From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 A7B6C69941 for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 09:28:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 9E54633AC8 for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 09:28:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-wr1-x42e.google.com (mail-wr1-x42e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42e]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 1C40F33AB4 for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 09:28:20 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wr1-x42e.google.com with SMTP id d15so7422397wrv.5 for ; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 00:28:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=odiso-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=message-id:subject:from:to:date:in-reply-to:references:user-agent :mime-version; bh=p7+NdROWGhaZh3NJEbcg/XRisUfGPL952sqXlc722hg=; b=LRJCRYa96EQqoIyR873ee6tasE8BRkU6A7IMuN7ffGNowp8N7REzwE//vPpnHavLJX Gt5Q2SSte/J2WnqL58RitQR7zhgEVB2oL6MPsRwwhNyOdlSaNlZeAh98TSQPYmVAPu/z Gqs3WHULWAcowc67lrrDG9LFNAOXNkAao6+5thn3BYKps6wghqPBGk4W9bomzmey+gAH OslFWShMoIXdwZ/jPlOWWdKsw38whm+6f0ISLOf+6omrnMW5syV4p4QkA/X5aj3LWGX3 6MynN/osjItYk/fn4cHEKJyuVXkiKD/Jsh5nYEMGM+zdqeaXpaKn2AwOWW1+/8ShuZvu Dq/Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:date:in-reply-to :references:user-agent:mime-version; bh=p7+NdROWGhaZh3NJEbcg/XRisUfGPL952sqXlc722hg=; b=cWyneFxbGFRwRt56cutPW5eS3Z0paaQernKL0QcQQg5hdJg8QwigsAXuORqAzjjgo5 Za0oATvwcRDpeNGQNfwqBGnZkYtYHvNA1YXhJCh26v+8ZMIAHEuMjsOoJVN0BvLGVsOt aFzuO7pJGZSXTQrxo8twzWHzVoGriZl0nOYBYb/qXzPlA7FUJTGmxwkbzb4cu6nR53h6 OO+fxyaw6Q3lmaLtKQ8njGboFT+yUUOeCue2L+8gSAqEE4VuvJVaFq//UpDeh1DJWQxE lWhnHipXpcpBKGwehCKpS8AjbZZWIC+5UZP0Ift1LRdC6jTpfrn2KxrMYHSunh79U00m u05A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533HFF+DOEjqS47HmrSL9AdD/1Eor4IExpJA+wPm1R0+V/+Qwdic vG/F5jloJGu3UMQGRukU6TU1cFMZjTAKoQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwL2ejHugSe+LjDTslHn7Zd833Oo8WsutE6poEPb4hCGgyzjpMXer7iJqLEH9v8eMa1D1fz9g== X-Received: by 2002:adf:fac1:: with SMTP id a1mr26736713wrs.98.1614760093773; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 00:28:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2a0a:1580:0:1::100c? (ovpn1.odiso.net. [2a0a:1580:2000::3f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l15sm5166698wmh.21.2021.03.03.00.28.13 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 03 Mar 2021 00:28:13 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <05bd2df1ffd2a5762c149abefc7f1afe2b3326b6.camel@odiso.com> From: aderumier@odiso.com To: Proxmox VE user list Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2021 09:28:11 +0100 In-Reply-To: <22970BC8-1653-4B05-AB1C-99E140F8856A@web.de> References: <22970BC8-1653-4B05-AB1C-99E140F8856A@web.de> User-Agent: Evolution 3.38.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.109 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 HTML_MESSAGE 0.001 HTML included in message RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE -0.0001 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, no trust 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="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2021 08:28:22 -0000 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 of them --> so no quorum,   just use "pvecm expected 5") Le mercredi 03 mars 2021 à 08:25 +0100, Roland privat a écrit : > hello, > > we want to build an experimental dynamic „datacenter“ 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‘s 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 „farm“ but not a cluster. but we want centralized > 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