From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <devzero@web.de> Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C7C3769E8E for <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 12:56:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id B449936945 for <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 12:56:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from mout.web.de (mout.web.de [212.227.17.12]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 93E3436931 for <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 12:56:09 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=web.de; s=dbaedf251592; t=1614772565; bh=iuEtqlQcuzINZRdJqT6NoUeT/HtE5y1i07qjGBZKqa0=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=oPoLZ+XypmIZWQ1cuE1tUB9tWLeZG0yQSk10ZrbbhKjJW4B46JVMxRKM+bQPQIGl1 d3WNMqsynrksscKJgLkh9hQ4rtWvLAfzTIMEjFpL3SRkW9PfGFOeU0ojmHAjMYJ2Tr 7Pk6DBBKkLVKfYX9bmBbQAucRPooDvoJ1EDILj6g= X-UI-Sender-Class: c548c8c5-30a9-4db5-a2e7-cb6cb037b8f9 Received: from Rolands-MacBook-Pro.cybercon.de ([5.147.247.76]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb105 [213.165.67.124]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1N6K1b-1lsYCS0XpR-016b4r; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 12:56:05 +0100 To: Proxmox VE user list <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com> References: <22970BC8-1653-4B05-AB1C-99E140F8856A@web.de> <05bd2df1ffd2a5762c149abefc7f1afe2b3326b6.camel@odiso.com> <caf40561-4659-da76-38f0-df012d973a34@web.de> <mailman.67.1614771764.456.pve-user@lists.proxmox.com> From: Roland <devzero@web.de> Message-ID: <fc0e05a9-8d99-8e9a-8d4e-d25f6560a972@web.de> Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2021 12:56:08 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <mailman.67.1614771764.456.pve-user@lists.proxmox.com> X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:+q/jLcrgAB5ojr2lBtKPp934euRaGrPwY5oZd8p3tuW1kaXm3tA IyciGYMzHCyRBscfPidStoTXw/PbTiWFzwnwblBbh0s1JDNqCWLoj6l7fKGZ7gBUYek6TT4 FuFVgVbprJsG2ZgrZO6nsPxaQ/yfOBTI6o1yWJAJSeH7mgarCNwWfBVdK91kL1Duh/vTKav kWJscaEtdsc27yDYbh7NQ== X-Spam-Flag: NO X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:xew2jWqyv6s=:tiUqvkDwSNboL22bqQIABX qg8pV4X0UyFSGhaCeeLLdcVf+QHGrPIxM3JRlKvcZLuALs98r6I/n9jF+N85uIUCxbpd91yLM KzmhhCm0+NOjcSFbD/TzdHGLCIvQwczTAlxetyAfyVnW66bmSp7VijblP5LIK7Ltx+bdaZqd7 wCSSPpqnleNHVyglK8dd13qQBgVRIWb7F5Q96X329A2OrC+tWBt8NzlYorSzM8DXiXOw4TgPN AoXAFc/iJZLbAZSU1zq5ZHmvnRjJoxUyRXpnB4o0IHicQ93BSD5HrXIt5BEHywwx1bmfuqa3Z K/VPZ+ghXAb1H7KOPu9MEXNzNUq5ABP2C2Ryt66fosKqfnxq4hSR+iqEULBeLXILdKBTx9dBt XSwB0v1wq/AWTVjDmDIIt9SLzUDdkYB3KztcnPbCJnilqbMo3ZaFEfWO3+98M5eHhk2PE8kc/ /iIP66TeKnku1n6VWuTRsBYDgbYJo0SIEIevJyb2WTEl53Xqbn3kfh3GZzjZvsgHt34g476Bv 2KrqZu93cxrIUbWZAHH2XqVbyUVDQlziw8uPN8pPaQx/nCHSG9xG5o/UAhUN+idoEE0GHha8J K2RY5caNejWkEIWjqLNGiiivlX79y7Er4RbgkYTb9RMr2IcWklz38OrT3VeuEsBQdFi4n04G1 RyLq5lGAmJ5uIXW+utaamsbRkJEx4WMrwoOZ9I0nkLPff/3IKJi6ZNnN3l9WXfX+Evj7H0Sbs 6lkFtavvXMHr+peJbmMo0yw58qrR5OtSsaIbsDkSyMjCJ4dorJs1AizKj6MKEMUf9elGiGstf YFjy01e52l7S1WolIqnCZVXjlUqesPefzfB60JqKoYC+4T5tunHp+yhrYYP/4pblbblrILRnE A4o6p4S2cQoaqucFPlVw== X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.076 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain FREEMAIL_FROM 0.001 Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider HTML_MESSAGE 0.001 HTML included in message NICE_REPLY_A -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW -0.7 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, low trust RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3 0.001 Good reputation (+3) RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL 0.001 Mailspike good senders SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [proxmox.com] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 Subject: Re: [PVE-User] proxmox serverfarm - how? X-BeenThere: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE user list <pve-user.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-user>, <mailto:pve-user-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-user/> List-Post: <mailto:pve-user@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pve-user-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user>, <mailto:pve-user-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2021 11:56:10 -0000 yes, that's what i would expect to happen and i'd like to avoid. Am 03.03.21 um 12:42 schrieb Humberto Jose de Sousa via pve-user: > > Re: [PVE-User] proxmox serverfarm - how?.eml > > Betreff: > Re: [PVE-User] proxmox serverfarm - how? > Von: > Humberto Jose de Sousa <humbertos@ifsc.edu.br> > Datum: > 03.03.21, 12:42 > > An: > Proxmox VE user list <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com> > > > The worst thing that may happen is a split brain cluster if you set "pve= cm > expected 1" > > Em qua., 3 de mar. de 2021 =E0s 08:26, Roland<devzero@web.de> escreveu: > >> the question for me is, what can go wrong this way or in what way >> clustering conflicts with the idea of running a "temporary server farm" >> which is shutdown completely for long periods. >> >> what happens for example if i set "pvecm expected 1" and >> startup/shutdown different individual servers or pairs of servers? i >> think that won't fit... >> >> when setting "pvecm expected 1" , wouldn't we need to know which >> server(s) of the farm was being used last and shutdown last? >> >> so, rethinking about this - doesn't it make sense to have something up >> and running independently of that farm for maintaining cluster >> state/node information? >> >> what about adding one or two rasberry pi or two virtual maschines "on >> some other, independent pve systems" as quorum/qdevice , setting "pvecm >> expected 1 or 2" then and have proper backup for these ? can we >> use/install virtual instances of proxmox for this ? >> >> regards >> roland >> >> >> Am 03.03.21 um 09:28 schriebaderumier@odiso.com: >>> Hi, if you have something central, knowning exactly how much nodes are >>> currently running, and stop/starting them dynamically >>> >>> you could play with "pvecm expected X" to tell how many vote you need >>> to have quorum. >>> >>> (for example, you have 10 nodes builded in corosync, you shutdown 5 o= f >>> them --> so no quorum, just use "pvecm expected 5") >>> >>> >>> Le mercredi 03 mars 2021 =E0 08:25 +0100, Roland privat a =E9crit : >>>> hello, >>>> >>>> we want to build an experimental dynamic =84datacenter=93 in our >>>> makerspace (mostly for academic purpose), where the number of nodes >>>> online depends on energy availability, heat demand, processing >>>> demand, .... , but if i see this right a proxmox cluster needs half >>>> of the nodes +1 online to have quorum, i.e. for example we wont be >>>> able to start a vm if only two out of 10 nodes are online. >>>> >>>> what=91s the best way to solve this, i.e. what is the most >>>> secure/consistent way? >>>> >>>> eg for a cluster of 10 nodes, what about adding 10 virtual proxmox >>>> dummy nodes or qdevice instances in another location (so one single >>>> physical host online has quorum) instead of tuning node/quorum number >>>> in corosync configuration? >>>> >>>> what we want is a =84farm=93 but not a cluster. but we want centraliz= ed >>>> management and vm migration. >>>> >>>> regards >>>> roland >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> pve-user mailing list >>>> pve-user@lists.proxmox.com >>>> https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user >>> _______________________________________________ >>> pve-user mailing list >>> pve-user@lists.proxmox.com >>> https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user >> _______________________________________________ >> pve-user mailing list >> pve-user@lists.proxmox.com >> https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user >> > > _______________________________________________ > pve-user mailing list > pve-user@lists.proxmox.com > https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user