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 35ADD74734 for ; Fri, 9 Jul 2021 12:17:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8DB78239AD for ; Fri, 9 Jul 2021 12:16:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from styx18.konzept-is.de (styx18.konzept-is.de [212.62.202.218]) (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 firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 7B4BD2399F for ; Fri, 9 Jul 2021 12:16:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [172.16.10.177] (unknown [172.16.10.177]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: storm) by styx18.konzept-is.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2A01020097 for ; Fri, 9 Jul 2021 12:16:39 +0200 (CEST) To: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com References: <17e68a3840a9442d8f0e845493964dca@xpecto.com> From: Ralf Storm Message-ID: Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2021 12:16:38 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <17e68a3840a9442d8f0e845493964dca@xpecto.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.847 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -0.001 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 Subject: Re: [PVE-User] Question about best way to replace boot disk of a proxmox + ceph node 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: Fri, 09 Jul 2021 10:17:17 -0000 Hello Christoph, please read the documentation about removing/replacing a Node carefully - you may not reinstall it with the same IP and/or Name as this will crash your whole cluster! I would use the node6 to move the ceph-part and then reinstall the node with new ip and name. For the boot disks we use 2 or 3 mirrored zfs disks to be sure... Best regards Ralf Am 09.07.2021 um 11:43 schrieb Christoph Weber: > Hi everybody, > > we have one proxmox node (node3) with ceph where the boot disk is beginning to fail (In fact we already experienced some defective system libraries which led to kernel panic on boot until we were able to determine the affected library to be replaced with a working copy). > > We see two possible ways: > a) clone the partially defective disk to a new ssd which would keep all configuration, but might also copy defective files > b) install a fresh copy of proxmox 6.4 with two subvariants: > b1) only configure the same network interface address and name and join the proxmox and ceph cluster when the node has booted up > b2) copy network configuration and /etc/ceph folder from defective node to the new disk before booting - and then join the proxmox cluster. In this case the question is, if there are more files to be copied like /etc/corosync? > > Method b1 seems to be the most safe to me, but I'm not 100% sure if it might be a problem when we cluster join the node3 again with the same name and ip address as it was. > Would we have to prepare ceph or proxmox for this? Remove the node3 from ceph and/or proxmox before we re-join it? > > Additional Bonus: We have a fresh node (node6) without disks set up - we might move the ceph disks from the node3 to the new node6 before we replace the bootdisk. > > Any opinions/suggestions would be greatly appreciated >