for my curiousity, in a cluster i can have "rpool" on both nodes (both are local to each node, i.e. are different pools but with same name) and i can blazingly fast offline migrate VMs from rpool on node1 to rpool on node2 (as it's done via zfs snapshot).
but i cannot add a second pool "hddpool" on different disks on both nodes with gui, as i get error "storage ID 'hddpool' already defined (500)" if i want to add 2nd zfs pool to node2 with the same name. what i can do is adding pool via commandline on node2 and then remove "nodes node1" from strorage.cfg (manual edit) to make it analogous to rpool - i can use hddpool like rpool after that. i wonder if this is the proper "way to go"!? anybody running proxmox cluster without shared storage as larger scale? what i try is developing a concept for running a maintainable vm infrastructure without need for HA shared storage&networking (as we have vm live migration including disks and on server defect, i simply could pull all disks out and put into a spare machine of same type) regards Roland Am 16.02.20 um 11:28 schrieb Roland @web.de:
hello, why do i need to have the same local storage name when migrating a vm from node1 to node2 in dual-node cluster with local disks ? i'm curious that migration is possible in online state (which is much more complex/challenging task) without a problem, but offline i get "storage is not available on selected target" (because there are differenz zfs pools on both machines) i guess there is no real technical hurdle, it just needs to get implemented appropriatley !? regards roland _______________________________________________ pve-user mailing list pve-user@pve.proxmox.com https://pve.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user
_______________________________________________ pve-user mailing list pve-user@pve.proxmox.com https://pve.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user