Proxmox VE 9.0 BETA released!
- Thread starter t.lamprecht
- Start date
Neither our successful internal testing on a wide range of HWs nor the feedback from the community support your statement.
That would rather point to the downloaded ISO. Did you ensure your downloaded PVE 9 ISO file is valid?
You could, e.g., compare the sha256sum with one listed in: https://enterprise.proxmox.com/iso/SHA256SUMS
And if that's not wrong, then please open a new thread, mention my nick here with @ and provide more details about which method you used to prepare the medium, which USB pen drive model you use–which should allow to interfer if it's attached vias USB as SCSI (UAS) or older methods–and the hardware you try to use it, e.g. EFI or legacy BIOS, which CPU and motherboard model.
Webhook notification targets using POST method that worked in 8.4.5 seem to have issues in 9.0.0~18 beta. With working config details from 8.4.5 transposed, it returns the following error when Test is clicked: "Could not test target: bad uri: POST is missing scheme (500)"
There don't seen to be any invisible characters mucking it up... anyone else experienced this?
There don't seen to be any invisible characters mucking it up... anyone else experienced this?
My upgrade path ended up working so didn't need to do a fresh install so gave up on the usb. I was using a 32GB patriot USB on a Z890 Creator WiFI with latest BIIOS. I had no issues running the 8.4 installer on this machine with the same process, and a mini but will try some more when i build the new backup host. I always use the DD method, which I have for years. I tried etcher on windows and popos and had the same issues.
my sha256sum: f3454df2a985c32a7426a41b3f73e1a6312626bfd1aba658ffa2e34292012aed
Last edited:
Yes, this happens to me as well on PVE 9.0.0~19 and PBS 4.0.8 for my Discord webhooks. I have tried creating a brand new one with no avail.
Thanks for the reports, this should be fixed by
https://lore.proxmox.com/pve-devel/20250804080604.118202-1-l.wagner@proxmox.com/T/#u
I hope that snapshot trees will come in a future version.
I've used Hyper-V for a long time and I miss this feature.
It makes software testing much easier as you can jump around in the tree with different Windows updates and software versions.
I am most looking forward to the feature:
- Snapshots for thick-provisioned LVM shared storage, e.g., for setups connected over iSCSI or Fibre Channel to a SAN.
Hi, I also think that the >> vendor agnostic << snapshot function for LVM shared block storage is a highly anticipated feature for many Proxmox VE users ... especially coming/migrating from a Vsphere/ESXi and enterprise (SAN / FC) environment.
I haven't tested it so far (will do soon) - the current Beta documentation regarding this feature is a little bit sparse .... so is there maybe some more explanation available how this works under the hood ? e.g. as soon as a snapshot is taken - is the initial/original LV/VM disk marked read-only (= backing disk) and then for every additional snapshot a new LV (delta/overlay LV) is created (automatically) out of the corresponding VG - with which size ? and must the LV size be actively monitored not running out of space ? etc .... thank you
I haven't tested it so far (will do soon) - the current Beta documentation regarding this feature is a little bit sparse .... so is there maybe some more explanation available how this works under the hood ? e.g. as soon as a snapshot is taken - is the initial/original LV/VM disk marked read-only (= backing disk) and then for every additional snapshot a new LV (delta/overlay LV) is created (automatically) out of the corresponding VG - with which size ? and must the LV size be actively monitored not running out of space ? etc .... thank you
Last edited:
Currently each Snapshot lv use the same space than base image. In the future, we ll look to add thin provisionning with Dynamic lv resizing.
Works for me as well on beta 9.0.0~22, thank you for being so quick!
Hi,
https://pve.proxmox.com/pve-docs/chapter-sysadmin.html#system_software_updates
For production systems you shouldn't have used the beta to begin with
Starting fresh is recommended there.
For upgrading systems with Proxmox VE 8 or installing new systems, see the official upgrade guide: https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Upgrade_from_8_to_9
and the release announcement:
if you want to continue using it as a test system, you can simply upgrade using apt:
https://pve.proxmox.com/pve-docs/chapter-sysadmin.html#system_software_updates
For production systems you shouldn't have used the beta to begin with
Starting fresh is recommended there.For upgrading systems with Proxmox VE 8 or installing new systems, see the official upgrade guide: https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Upgrade_from_8_to_9
and the release announcement:
Last edited:
For production systems you shouldn't have used the beta to begin with
Reality is though, nobody is going to do that
I'm guessing we can just disable the pve-test repo and enable the no-subscription one?
OSPF is unique since FRR uses two daemons for IPv4 / 6 (OSPFv2 / 3) and we initially decided to only support IPv4 because of this. When we implement BGP, we certainly want to support dual-stack setups.