In some situations, e.g. having a large resource mapping, the UI can
generate a request that is bigger than the current limit of 64KiB.
Our files in pmxcfs can grow up to 1 MiB, so theoretically, a single
mapping can grow to that size. In practice, a single entry will have
much less. In #6230, a u
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Stefan !
>>It should work for redistributing EVPN routes via BGP, but if you
>>want
>>to use the BGP controller with loopback + multiple address families
>>this
>>doesn't seem to work.
ah shit, never tested mutiple address families on loopback on my side.
(Need to add a
gave this a quick spin on my test cluster, notes below
On 12/19/24 17:17, Alexandre Derumier wrote:
> reported by user on the forum:
> https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/sdn-mismatch-afi-with-bgp-controller-ipv6-session.159250/
>
> This is for dualstack, when evpn is ipv4, and bgp is ipv6+(ipv4)
>
Also adjust the ballooning documentation to mention and
cross-reference this node option.
Signed-off-by: Friedrich Weber
---
pvenode.adoc | 13 +
qm.adoc | 13 -
2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/pvenode.adoc b/pvenode.adoc
index 21a46a8
Automatic memory allocation (ballooning) is implemented in pvestatd, which
assigns memory to or reclaims memory from eligible VMs in order to reach a
certain target memory usage on the host. The target is currently hardcoded at
80%. Users have reported [1] that this target is unnecessarily low on h
The option is intended for the percentage of host memory that pvestatd
uses as the target for automatic memory allocation (ballooning).
Signed-off-by: Friedrich Weber
---
PVE/NodeConfig.pm | 8
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/PVE/NodeConfig.pm b/PVE/NodeConfig.pm
index 5f5
Currently, the automatic memory management (ballooning) performed by
pvestatd targets 80% memory usage. Users have reported that this
target is unnecessarily low on hosts with large amounts of RAM.
Thus, read the target from the node config option `ballooning-target`.
Also change the ballooning de
This corresponds to the `ballooning-target` node config option.
Also make the left column slightly wider, so the texts fit better.
Signed-off-by: Friedrich Weber
---
www/manager6/node/NodeOptionsView.js | 18 ++
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
diff --git a/www/manager6/node/No
Am 13.11.24 um 11:52 schrieb Fabian Grünbichler:
> didn't give this too close a look since it's an example only, but the
> hard-coded NBD indices make me wonder whether we want to have some sort
> of mechanism to "reserve" NBD slots while using them, at least for *our*
> usage?
Fixed in v5. I just
... on all chains that check for ct state. Since we support this option,
we should also use it in our firewall rule generation.
This is a follow-up to
64dc344b ("firewall: apply `nt_conntrack_allow_invalid` option to guest
table")
Signed-off-by: Hannes Laimer
---
Thanks @Stefan for the review
... on the guest table. There is no reason to not repect that option
on those two chains. These two were missed in the referenced commit.
Signed-off-by: Hannes Laimer
Fixes: 64dc344b ("firewall: apply `nt_conntrack_allow_invalid` option to guest
table")
Tested-by: Stefan Hanreich
Reviewed-by: S
Upgrading from a pre-PVE 6 version directly to a (current) PVE 8.x
version can never work in the first place, so the test is not needed
anymore.
The snippet was added by commit 3a98190 ("add postinst script") and
enabled by commit 243262f ("fix #2079: activate authkey rotation every
24 hours").
S
On 3/12/25 11:18, Hannes Laimer wrote:
> On 3/4/25 13:24, Stefan Hanreich wrote:
>> default-in is also checking for conntrack status, so we should put this
>
> I think `default-in` is currently noop'ing[1] ct state invalid, am I
> missing something? I though maybe there's a reason for that, so I
>
Hi, thanks for the v3! I looked into this together with Mira and we have
some further comments.
Some general comments:
- The indentation settings look off, please have a look at our Perl
style guide [1].
- If you haven't done so yet, please make sure to send a CLA [0].
First, I want to point ou
On Fri Mar 7, 2025 at 9:24 AM CET, Roland Kammerer wrote:
> Hi Max,
>
> took me a bit longer than expected, but here we go...
>
Thanks a lot for your detailed feedback, it's highly appreciated!
You'll probably be delighted that a couple of the things you mentioned
are already in progress:
- We'r
On 3/4/25 13:24, Stefan Hanreich wrote:
default-in is also checking for conntrack status, so we should put this
I think `default-in` is currently noop'ing[1] ct state invalid, am I
missing something? I though maybe there's a reason for that, so I
left it as is, as with the change we'd drop t
some manufacturer seem to report leading white space in the
`ID_SERIAL_SHORT` field. the regex failed here, as it just didn't
match the whitespace at all.
reported on the forum:
https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/nvme-drive-serial-unknown.163480/#post-754953
Signed-off-by: Shannon Sterz
---
not
On 11/03/2025 11:40, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
> On March 10, 2025 3:01 pm, Friedrich Weber wrote:
>> On 07/03/2025 13:14, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
# LVM-thick/LVM-thin
Note that this change affects all LVs on LVM-thick, not just ones on shared
storage. As a result, also on sin
18 matches
Mail list logo
