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 13AC7DBA4 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 16:52:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 022C622B6 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 16:52:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mxout04.lancloud.ru (mxout04.lancloud.ru [45.84.86.114]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id E8B8922A4 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 16:52:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from LanCloud DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mxout04.lancloud.ru 79F04209AD8C Received: from LanCloud Received: from LanCloud Received: from LanCloud Received: from LanCloud Message-ID: <8ca4f90c-4b01-2d16-2249-0bb3f9b9e15e@t8.ru> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 17:52:12 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.7.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Proxmox VE user list , Mark Schouten References: From: =?UTF-8?B?0KHQtdGA0LPQtdC5INCm0LDQsdC+0LvQvtCy?= In-Reply-To: X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.410 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20 1.546 HTML: images with 1600-2000 bytes of words HTML_MESSAGE 0.001 HTML included in message HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3 0.148 HTML is very short with a linked image KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment KAM_NUMSUBJECT 0.5 Subject ends in numbers excluding current years KAM_SHORT 0.001 Use of a URL Shortener for very short URL MIXED_ES 1.07 Too many es are not es NICE_REPLY_A -3.247 Looks like a legit reply (A) SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record T_REMOTE_IMAGE 0.01 Message contains an external image T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - UNPARSEABLE_RELAY 0.001 Informational: message has unparseable relay lines Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 Subject: Re: [PVE-User] Backup/timeout issues PVE 6.4 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: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 14:52:51 -0000 The Synology path mount over NFS is shared on 3 nodes ? 19.04.2022 17:46, Eneko Lacunza via pve-user пишет: > _______________________________________________ > pve-user mailing list > pve-user@lists.proxmox.com > https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user С уважением Сергей Цаболов Системный Администратор ООО "Т8" Тел.: +74992716161 Моб: +79850334875 logo_T8rus tsabolov@t8.ru ООО «Т8», 107076, г. Москва Краснобогатырская ул., д. 44, стр.1 www.t8.ru >From elacunza@binovo.es Tue Apr 19 16:54:47 2022 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com Delivered-To: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com 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 D4921DB7C for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 16:54:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D254D23D0 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 16:54:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-wm1-x32b.google.com (mail-wm1-x32b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32b]) (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 028C423BB for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 16:54:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm1-x32b.google.com with SMTP id n126-20020a1c2784000000b0038e8af3e788so1667729wmn.1 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 07:54:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=binovo.es; s=google; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :references:from:in-reply-to; bh=fJwBZDJRF4pU3BjompcDXTMb/V+4PV3Z8Suqybe7nVA=; b=rv1L5iKiH3B4gXA/SDdLYkNChyJ88HngqmgK/2iEO/pLO51z6fbExd3dSqvZt1QRQn DDKDE/dwi5LLV7A1rplXl75V8v4MJO4Miw6EOuBgW3crBDR5Rrkeft1q4afju9c/W0gv jKA9O8CVbAnnQdttXYVY20nCzdCPrCS6W3pYthGe2P8bqVWy/sRdILRsBzzyToaA41ps fmcMRfG53m19+X7ofuUXNXeFdhuBR06BKfEybgjGbuYDX9wt8AJvXSWiAsdY2x07K++2 FuRMXNE3v1gz5uSO232UhA4Osy5yrTlAOoUdGPP4SDNOK2eo1j2rR3Ty78480n/GcwwQ suqg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:references:from:in-reply-to; bh=fJwBZDJRF4pU3BjompcDXTMb/V+4PV3Z8Suqybe7nVA=; b=JrF8hbC/9U3VMgjgdvh4CXZyLS/sAKCIgyOV+V5a62aWLz4tRe4ONuhTLIoUwGIwXz GfUvFtIeR/LRfb0GKrBVL1VCdOKR0rLH4YfYeWZ1SeUKWaMLtFnQMQNiboX/S+6CCsYO HGpFBeGZjye75KpxQ6jzBHjra0ZzepUJrlOTsMLepM5ELWjz64T2X72H63qZC5NP6SZx H5ouTDYz3fh7tt0VGhxzbgyRIUmJ1psPU9OqBNvsri5D41MY7y/AdfTi+L1cBbzKmVCS 2FkvQtMWGL9nw3nnLhf1qhNa34aCUfmafg4piO37RVeMEHAvUlIMYHtdTmH0JD/Sq+Sb Z7hQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533q1tv5N6cdO85GRUbUD42A3aB4i6cXxOKQHEeZQE+lEKqoBzhl cCxPTahQOCU3DjQyl75JOGadlpCxg3rfTw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxTzZmpVKBAaohCIhuEAOHM3RSr0RWTiWSVMGXiJjYqhAzRoNB7YmtpV+1cXXQHwTlLk9o8Yg== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:a185:0:b0:392:206d:209d with SMTP id k127-20020a1ca185000000b00392206d209dmr16153594wme.168.1650380079405; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 07:54:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.29.37.190] (249.red-213-96-132.staticip.rima-tde.net. [213.96.132.249]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k65-20020a1ca144000000b003929a64ab63sm4997378wme.38.2022.04.19.07.54.38 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 19 Apr 2022 07:54:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <0fb91be8-9308-f50e-896a-d1ee950d684d@binovo.es> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 16:54:38 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.7.0 Subject: Re: [PVE-User] PowerEdge R440 & watchdog timer Content-Language: es-CO To: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com References: <746cb313-1ee4-8481-6904-a261634202e9@t8.ru> <20220415165642.0e5b20cb@sleipner.datanom.net> From: Eneko Lacunza In-Reply-To: X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 1.738 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 HTML_MESSAGE 0.001 HTML included in message NICE_REPLY_A -3.247 Looks like a legit reply (A) 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 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 14:54:47 -0000 Hi, El 15/4/22 a las 18:04, Michael Rasmussen via pve-user escribió: >> For the last 10 years I have been using Proxmox I have not have a lost >> connection to a server for over 1 sec without it being intentionally >> but if your circumstances is another usecase I would go for stackable >> switches I have a port for either switch connected to my servers and >> UPS control for all my servers. >> >> Loosing connection to a server for more than 1 sec can only mean >> hardware failure or loss of power. >> > Forgot to mention that all my infrastructure and hardware is UPS > controlled so only planned downtime has been when replacing UPS/battery > in UPS (3 times) and one time when there was a longer period without > power from the power grid (1 time and not planned ;-). > Unfortunately, starting with PVE 7.x we're seeing cluster issues (nodes going out of quorum only to rejoin instantly) "too often". This is why we create multiple links for corosync after upgrading clusters to v7, so that one of these point-in-time issues with network doesn't reboot a node. So far it has worked well. Unfortunately, we haven't been able to find a common pattern/cause in several clusters we see the issue. Cheers Eneko Lacunza Zuzendari teknikoa | Director técnico Binovo IT Human Project Tel. +34 943 569 206 |https://www.binovo.es Astigarragako Bidea, 2 - 2º izda. Oficina 10-11, 20180 Oiartzun https://www.youtube.com/user/CANALBINOVO https://www.linkedin.com/company/37269706/