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) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54BD86A02E for ; Wed, 15 Sep 2021 16:11:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 489111A5EB for ; Wed, 15 Sep 2021 16:11:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mx1.xpecto.de (mx1.xpecto.de [212.102.161.249]) (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 firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 813851A5E0 for ; Wed, 15 Sep 2021 16:11:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (mx1.xpecto.de [127.0.0.1]) by mx1.xpecto.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FD7B320026 for ; Wed, 15 Sep 2021 16:03:08 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=xpecto.com; s=20170902; t=1631714588; bh=3xO2r5LO9i+OvS0gefCw/CMwrbupswW/kdoFFPAXwDw=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=sIIm/YyPd8+4gqxBJcX70QehwgqzEIoG/Kyb8RLm2qalH6MK3vUOGAm+elyC5rvok 5ZACobqFGp526c3XJSgXh05/xbOJpG8HsSU5Gk7BOFvAeHIE3SVdAb7SvSfAcv/B0Z jrbhSpIow+uDHBUtvJseHetKcT6px4g0RGP1GWC62SogsmpE1J94x8tnC5ofAvEKIr jbRD5rr2cjyeUqhXuBLsgbD5IJMq8ug06ZF6nP/kBMF0xXjy5Jm1EqjiI22Zh+uXUB 5FUgdCIDc4s6wUS7x2/5Gq89WMudxkDQcssj8fOpsT8nlAXtZTFy+hvorFHGhJTtXa HAv8BzUdqAGNQ== X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mx1.xpecto.de X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -50.09 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-50.09 tagged_above=-999 required=2 tests=[BAYES_00=-1, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.399, LOCAL_RCVD=-50, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mx1.xpecto.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx1.xpecto.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3nXWz8Jy6PtC for ; Wed, 15 Sep 2021 16:03:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from postman.xpecto.de (postman.xpecto.local [10.208.30.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.xpecto.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Wed, 15 Sep 2021 16:03:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from postman.xpecto.local (10.208.30.11) by postman.xpecto.local (10.208.30.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2308.14; Wed, 15 Sep 2021 16:03:05 +0200 Received: from postman.xpecto.local ([fe80::f965:5e8e:bcd:74f3]) by postman.xpecto.local ([fe80::f965:5e8e:bcd:74f3%4]) with mapi id 15.01.2308.014; Wed, 15 Sep 2021 16:03:05 +0200 From: Christoph Weber To: "'pve-user@lists.proxmox.com'" Thread-Topic: pve-user Digest, Vol 162, Issue 12 Thread-Index: AQHXqhh5Rck5RzYiM0K/MVvpPHxv/qulICyw Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 14:03:04 +0000 Message-ID: <739ee43f9b4e459aac45c3a7fd88e20a@xpecto.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US Content-Language: de-DE X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [192.168.2.17] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.050 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% 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 KAM_NUMSUBJECT 0.5 Subject ends in numbers excluding current years SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record T_SPF_PERMERROR 0.01 SPF: test of record failed (permerror) URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [xpecto.com, proxmox.com] Subject: Re: [PVE-User] pve-user Digest, Vol 162, Issue 12 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, 15 Sep 2021 14:11:43 -0000 > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 10:15:08 +0200 > From: Marco Gaiarin > To: pve-user@pve.proxmox.com > Subject: [PVE-User] storage migration failed: error with cfs lock > 'storage-nfs-scratch': unable to create image: got lock timeout - > aborting command > Message-ID: <20210915081508.GC3261@sv.lnf.it> > We have correctly move some smaller disks (200GB), but if we try to move = a > 'big' disk, we got: >=20 > Sep 14 22:48:18 pveod1 pvedaemon[31552]: starting > task UPID:pveod1:00007BE2:A90E5224:61410A92:qmmove:100:root@pam: > Sep 14 22:49:18 pveod1 pvedaemon[31552]: end task > UPID:pveod1:00007BE2:A90E5224:61410A92:qmmove:100:root@pam: > storage migration failed: error with cfs lock 'storage-nfs-scratch': unab= le to > create image: got lock timeout - aborting command I think this thread might be relevant https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/error-with-cfs-lock-unable-to-create-im= age-got-lock-timeout-aborting-command.65786/ Quote: >>> we have a hard timeout of 60s for any operation obtaining a cluster loc= k, which includes volume allocation on shared storages. ... >>> your storage is simply too slow when allocating bigger images it seems.= you need to manually allocate them, for example using qemu-img create or c= onvert.