PVE 1.1 Installation broken after basic installation

[gbruckner]

Hi,

I tried to install Proxmox PVE 1.1 on a HP DL320G5p with a HW Raid 1 - somehow the installer asks me to choose /dev/sda or /dev/sdb to install to.

In my opinion this should not show up as I buildt a Raid 1 before - am I wrong here?

My first installation try also ended up in a Grub Error 21 ... currently trying the 2nd time to make sure I didnt choose anything wrong during installation.

Another point that it makes it hard to start over for a 2nd time with installation is the fact, that the installation is broken during creation of the LVM as another is already in place with the same name.
The installer should clean up before trying to install? - it states that all data will be lost during installion.

 

[gbruckner]

Feedback from the 2nd try - chose to install to /dev/sda (maybe I had /dev/sdb on 1st try due to some wrong pressed cursor ) and it boots now

 

[Guy]

the fact that you see both drives in the installer means that your not really doing RAID..

Let me guess you used the BIOS RAID which isn't really RAID it's software RAID. And Proxmox doesn't have kernel support for this. so you see both drives and you're not really RAIDing the disks!

--Guy

 

[dietmar]

What kind of RAID controller do you have?

 

[tom]

Hi,

I tried to install Proxmox PVE 1.1 on a HP DL320G5p with a HW Raid 1 - somehow the installer asks me to choose /dev/sda or /dev/sdb to install to.

Based on quick research on the hp website:

HP DL320G5p series includes:

"integrated Intel 82801IR Serial ATA Hostcontroller"

this is "fakeraid", not hard ware raid and not supported (software raid).

In my opinion this should not show up as I buildt a Raid 1 before - am I wrong here?

this is only the case if you have hardware raid. hostraid is a software raid.

My first installation try also ended up in a Grub Error 21 ... currently trying the 2nd time to make sure I didnt choose anything wrong during installation.

Another point that it makes it hard to start over for a 2nd time with installation is the fact, that the installation is broken during creation of the LVM as another is already in place with the same name.
The installer should clean up before trying to install? - it states that all data will be lost during installion.

 

[gbruckner]

Thank you for clarifying this - i was just confused as CentOS 5.2 detected it with the right name

 

[Guy]

Thank you for clarifying this - i was just confused as CentOS 5.2 detected it with the right name

Yeah CentOS knows about some soft RAID stuff..

the performance of software RAID is not the same as hardware RAID so you should think carefully.

--Guy

 

[gbruckner]

As I currently have no access to my test machine, can anybody tell me if the LVM of the installation is using one or both harddisks?

 

[tom]

As I currently have no access to my test machine, can anybody tell me if the LVM of the installation is using one or both harddisks?

1 disk (or 1 raid volume).

best:

1. install a BBU (batteries) on the raid controller
2. configure one raid 10 (minimum 4 drives). fastest read and write performance.
3. enable write cache on the raid controller (in case of power loss, the BBU keeps the data a few days)
4. disable write cache on the disks (to avoid lost of data in case of power lost)

 

[gbruckner]

thanks for your fast answer, but this is a little overpowered for my needs

 

[tom]

thanks for your fast answer, but this is a little overpowered for my needs

ok, but I thought I post this that other can see whats needed for a powerful server.

what do you run on Proxmox VE?

 

[gbruckner]

I just plan to migrate a webhosting environment to openVZ and split it up 2-3 VMs to have some testing environment

 

[tom]

I just plan to migrate a webhosting environment to openVZ and split it up 2-3 VMs to have some testing environment

check out the integrated backup - for testing extremely fast and useful.
(http://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Backup_-_Restore_-_Live_Migration)

I do not say that having a backup you can rely on a single disk but better than nothing.

just think of the latest hard drive disaster of Seagate. I just have a dead 1 TB drive (7200.11) in hand - due to the firmware bug ...