Search Results

Search found 594 results on 24 pages for 'libvirt kvm'.

Page 13/24 | < Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >

  • recommendations for efficient offsite remote backup solution of vm's

    - by senorsmile
    I am looking for recommendations for backing up my current 6 vm's(and soon to grow to up to 20). Currently I am running a two node proxmox cluster(which is a debian base using kvm for virtualization with a custom web front end to administer). I have two nearly identical boxes with amd phenom II x4's and asus motherboards. Each has 4 500 GB sata2 hdd's, 1 for the os and other data for the proxmox install, and 3 using mdadm+drbd+lvm to share the 1.5 TB's of storage between the two machines. I mount lvm images to kvm for all of the virtual machines. I currently have the ability to do live transfer from one machine to the other, typically within seconds(it takes about 2 minutes on the largest vm running win2008 with m$ sql server). I am using proxmox's built-in vzdump utility to take snapshots of the vm's and store those on an external harddrive on the network. I then have jungledisk service (using rackspace) to sync the vzdump folder for remote offsite backup. This is all fine and dandy, but it's not very scalable. For one, the backups themselves can take up to a few hours every night. With jungledisk's block level incremental transfers, the sync only transfers a small portion of the data offsite, but that still takes at least a half an hour. The much better solution would of course be something that allows me to instantly take the difference of two time points (say what was written from 6am to 7am), zip it, then send that difference file to the backup server which would instantly transfer to the remote storage on rackspace. I have looked a little into zfs and it's ability to do send/receive. That coupled with a pipe of the data in bzip or something would seem perfect. However, it seems that implementing a nexenta server with zfs would essentially require at least one or two more dedicated storage servers to serve iSCSI block volumes (via zvol's???) to the proxmox servers. I would prefer to keep the setup as minimal as possible (i.e. NOT having separate storage servers) if at all possible. I have also briefly read about zumastor. It looks like it could also do what I want, but it appears to have halted development in 2008. So, zfs, zumastor or other?

    Read the article

  • Scanning for new disks attached using virtio?

    - by larsks
    I can successfully attach disks to a running KVM instance using virsh attach-disk... virsh attach-disk node-1 /dev/vg_lunsr/lun1 vdb Disk attached successfully ...but these new devices aren't seen by the guest without a reboot, which almost defeats the purpose of dynamic attachment. If these were SCSI devices I would use e.g. /sys/class/scsi_host/host0/scan to request the SCSI drivers to scan for new devices. Is there an equivalent capability for the virtio block driver?

    Read the article

  • recommendations for efficient offsite remote backup solution of vm's

    - by senorsmile
    I am looking for recommendations for backing up my current 6 vm's(and soon to grow to up to 20). Currently I am running a two node proxmox cluster(which is a debian base using kvm for virtualization with a custom web front end to administer). I have two nearly identical boxes with amd phenom II x4's and asus motherboards. Each has 4 500 GB sata2 hdd's, 1 for the os and other data for the proxmox install, and 3 using mdadm+drbd+lvm to share the 1.5 TB's of storage between the two machines. I mount lvm images to kvm for all of the virtual machines. I currently have the ability to do live transfer from one machine to the other, typically within seconds(it takes about 2 minutes on the largest vm running win2008 with m$ sql server). I am using proxmox's built-in vzdump utility to take snapshots of the vm's and store those on an external harddrive on the network. I then have jungledisk service (using rackspace) to sync the vzdump folder for remote offsite backup. This is all fine and dandy, but it's not very scalable. For one, the backups themselves can take up to a few hours every night. With jungledisk's block level incremental transfers, the sync only transfers a small portion of the data offsite, but that still takes at least a half an hour. The much better solution would of course be something that allows me to instantly take the difference of two time points (say what was written from 6am to 7am), zip it, then send that difference file to the backup server which would instantly transfer to the remote storage on rackspace. I have looked a little into zfs and it's ability to do send/receive. That coupled with a pipe of the data in bzip or something would seem perfect. However, it seems that implementing a nexenta server with zfs would essentially require at least one or two more dedicated storage servers to serve iSCSI block volumes (via zvol's???) to the proxmox servers. I would prefer to keep the setup as minimal as possible (i.e. NOT having separate storage servers) if at all possible. I have also briefly read about zumastor. It looks like it could also do what I want, but it appears to have halted development in 2008. So, zfs, zumastor or other?

    Read the article

  • virsh XML interface allocation

    - by Kaushik Koneru
    I am trying to launch VM using a XML. This VM will be having 5 interfaces each connected to certain bridge. Issue here is allocation of these interfaces is random. My XML <interface type='bridge'> <mac address='52:54:00:9f:14:b3'/> <source bridge='br0'/> <target dev='vnet1'/> <model type='e1000'/> <alias name='net0'/> <address type='pci' domain='0x0000' bus='0x00' slot='0x03' function='0x0'/> </interface> <interface type='bridge'> <mac address='52:54:00:9f:14:b4'/> <source bridge='br1'/> <target dev='vnet2'/> <model type='e1000'/> <alias name='net1'/> <address type='pci' domain='0x0000' bus='0x00' slot='0x10' function='0x0'/> </interface> <interface type='bridge'> <mac address='52:54:00:9f:14:b5'/> <source bridge='br2'/> <target dev='vnet2'/> <model type='e1000'/> <alias name='net3'/> <address type='pci' domain='0x0000' bus='0x00' slot='0x12' function='0x0'/> </interface> <interface type='bridge'> <mac address='52:54:00:9f:14:c4'/> <source bridge='br3'/> <target dev='vnet3'/> <model type='e1000'/> <alias name='net4'/> <address type='pci' domain='0x0000' bus='0x00' slot='0x18' function='0x0'/> </interface> Allocation of interfaces are random mean e th6 will be connected to br3 ; eth7 -- br4 eth8 -- br2 eth9 -- br0. Is there any way to make it static?? At the same time is there anyway of assigning IP Address to these eth interfaces through XML file itself??

    Read the article

  • Force an LXC container to use its own IP address

    - by emma sculateur
    Sorry if this question has already been asked. I could not find it, I have this setup : +---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |HOST | | | | +-------------------------------------------------+ | | | UBUNTU-VM | | | | | | | | +-------------------+ | | | | |UBUNTU-LXC | | +------------------+ | | | | 10.0.0.3/24 | 10.0.0.1/24 | |OTHER VM | | | | | eth0-----lxcbr0----------eth0-----------br0----------eth0 | | | | | | 192.168.100.2/24| 192.168.100.1/24 |192.168.100.3/24 | | | | +-------------------+ | +------------------+ | | +-------------------------------------------------+ | +---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ When I ping 192.168.100.3 from my UBUNTU-LXC, the source IP address is automatically changed to 192.168.100.2 by UBUNTU-VM. It's like having a NAT, whereas I really want my UBUNTU-LXC to talk with it own IP address. Is there any way to do this ? Edit : these info may be relevant : I am using KVM +libvirt to set up my VMs Here is how I create my interface in UBUNTU-VM : <interface type='bridge'> <mac address='52:54:00:cb:aa:74'/> <source bridge='br0'/> <model type='e1000'/> <address type='pci' domain='0x0000' bus='0x00' slot='0x09' function='0x0'/> </interface>

    Read the article

  • Configure iptables with a bridge and static IPs

    - by Andrew Koester
    I have my server set up with several public IP addresses, with a network configuration as follows (with example IPs): eth0 \- br0 - 1.1.1.2 |- [VM 1's eth0] | |- 1.1.1.3 | \- 1.1.1.4 \- [VM 2's eth0] \- 1.1.1.5 My question is, how do I set up iptables with different rules for the actual physical server as well as the VMs? I don't mind having the VMs doing their own iptables, but I'd like br0 to have a different set of rules. Right now I can only let everything through, which is not the desired behavior (as br0 is exposed). Thanks!

    Read the article

  • virt-manager not installing

    - by Registered User
    I am trying to install virt-manager on 11.10 on 64 bit machine sudo aptitude install virt-manager here is where it stopped the install Processing triggers for python-support ... Errors were encountered while processing: libvirt-bin E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) A package failed to install. Trying to recover: Setting up libvirt-bin (0.9.2-4ubuntu15) ... useradd: cannot lock /etc/passwd; try again later. adduser: `/usr/sbin/useradd -d /var/lib/libvirt -g kvm -s /bin/false -u 118 libvirt-qemu' returned error code 1. Exiting. dpkg: error processing libvirt-bin (--configure): subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 1 Errors were encountered while processing: libvirt-bin What should be done in this case to resolve it?

    Read the article

  • Bridge virtual machines out WLAN interface

    - by Thomas
    It seems that my wlan card (intel 5100 AGN) firmware doesn't allow "spoofing" MAC addresses. This has the side effect of destroying the capability to bridge out my virtual machines on that interface. Apparently this is a common thing on wlan cards. I can see the incoming traffic just fine in my virtual machines, but their DHCP queries don't get bridged out of the WLAN card. It works perfectly well when using the wired ethernet port. Is there a workaround for this? MAC-NAT or something? I don't want to route my virtual machines out to the Internet because I don't want my host OS to even have an IP address. I'm using Linux and KVM for virtualization.

    Read the article

  • Limiting Sybase ASE 15 CPU usage on VM

    - by reiniero
    I've set up a single CPU Sybase ASE 15.7 test/hobby/experimentation system on a Debian Squeeze x64 KVM VM. I notice the CPU load goes to 100% and stays there. Definitely not a Sybase guru, only interested to see if some programs I'm running work on the database. Looking at Sybase docs it seems ASE detects the machine is idle and then takes over all processing just waiting for a connection (and if needed, doing some housekeeping apparently). Normally that would be fine but as it is running in a VM it's taking away processor resources other VMs could use - and the increased fan noise of the PC near my desk annoy me. I've tried to remedy this: set the "runnable process search count" parameter from DEFAULT (2000 IRC) to 3 in /opt/sybase/ASE-15_0/SYBASE.cfg from http://sybase.reygrobellet.com/tutorials/install_sybase_vb/standalone04_configure_oralin11#TOC-Configure-kernel I added this to my /etc/init.d/sybase startup script: echo 0 /proc/sys/kernel/randomize_va_space (though I don't think it'll make much difference) How can I tell Sybase to "behave" and not hog the processor - I don't mind reduced performance.

    Read the article

  • make vnc server listen on guest's ip address

    - by gucki
    My host system has the IP 192.168.0.250. Now I want to create a kvm guest using a tap device (so the network card of the guest just acts like a "real" one). The guest has a static ip 192.168.0.249 which it setups on his own (no dhcp). To connect to the guest using VNC I can to use the host's IP. So far everything works fine. Now I wonder how I can make the VNC server to listen on the guest's IP address, so I can use the guest's IP address to connect using my vnc client. Of course I cannot use -vnc 192.168.0.249:1 as this IP is not active on the host and so fails with Cannot assign requested address. Can this be done with tap networking at all? If not, how to get it working?

    Read the article

  • Connect three computers (including one laptop) to one monitor

    - by Jesse Beder
    I have the following hardware: 2 Desktop PCs, running Windows XP and Ubuntu Macbook Pro a LCD monitor, a wired keyboard, and a wired mouse Currently, I'm using an oldish IOGear KVM switch to connect the two PCs to the input/output (and it works very well). I'd like a setup that includes the laptop as well, ideally maintaining as much portability as possible (meaning I'd like to be able to sit down, easily plug in my laptop, work on all computers, then easily pick up and leave with the laptop - is docking station the right word here?). What hardware do I need to do this?

    Read the article

  • Netinstalling CentOS if the gateway is in a different subnet

    - by James Lawrie
    I have a KVM host (A) running a virtual machine (B). They each have their own external IP address and the networking is setup using bridging between eth0 and br0 on A. B uses eth0, with A being the gateway. The problem is that the two external IP addresses are on different subnets (different /8s in fact) so by default, B claims it cannot reach A (Network Unreachable). I can resolve this by adding a static route on B: echo "any host gateway_ip dev eth0" > /etc/sysconfig/static-routes Modifying /etc/init.d/networking to reload the gateway after applying static routes (I only added the final line before fi): if [ -f /etc/sysconfig/static-routes ]; then grep "^any" /etc/sysconfig/static-routes | while read ignore args ; do /sbin/route add -$args done route add default gw "${GATEWAY}" fi If I then restart networking, it comes online. How can I do this (or work around it some other way) prior to the system being installed, ideally inside an Anaconda kickstart file?

    Read the article

  • Bridge virtual machines out WLAN interface

    - by Thomas
    It seems that my wlan card (intel 5100 AGN) firmware doesn't allow "spoofing" MAC addresses. This has the side effect of destroying the capability to bridge out my virtual machines on that interface. Apparently this is a common thing on wlan cards. I can see the incoming traffic just fine in my virtual machines, but their DHCP queries don't get bridged out of the WLAN card. It works perfectly well when using the wired ethernet port. Is there a workaround for this? MAC-NAT or something? I don't want to route my virtual machines out to the Internet because I don't want my host OS to even have an IP address. I'm using Linux and KVM for virtualization.

    Read the article

  • Does kern.hz still have any relevance in FreeBSD if "dynamic tick mode" is enabled?

    - by Frerich Raabe
    I'm running a FreeBSD 9.0 setup as a virtual machine in a KVM setup. In previous versions of FreeBSD it was common to force the kern.hz setting to a lower value so that the virtual machine does not keep the host busy because it's handling timer interrupts without having any work to do - the FreeBSD Handbook explains: The most important step is to reduce the kern.hz tunable to reduce the CPU utilization of FreeBSD under the Parallels environment. This is accomplished by adding the following line to /boot/loader.conf: kern.hz=100 Without this setting, an idle FreeBSD Parallels guest OS will use roughly 15% of the CPU of a single processor iMac®. After this change the usage will be closer to a mere 5%. However, in FreeBSD 9, the "dynamic tick mode" (aka "tickless mode") is the default, controlled by the kern.eventtimer.periodic setting which defaults to 0 (read: tickless mode). This makes me wonder - does the tip of lowering kern.hz still have any relevance for making FreeBSD 9 play nicely in a virtual machine setup?

    Read the article

  • Proxmox - Uploading disk image

    - by davids
    I've got a KVM Virtual Machine in my local PC, and I'd like to copy it to a Proxmox server. According to the docs, I just have to create a new VM on Proxmox and add the existing disk image to it, but how do I upload the image to the server? In the admin panel, if I click in MyStorage - Content - Upload, it just give me options to upload ISOs, VZDump backup files or OpenVZ templates. Would it be enough with a copy using scp? In that case, in which folder?

    Read the article

  • Limit disk I/O one program creates?

    - by Posipiet
    Hardware: one virtualization server. Dual Nehalem, 24GB RAM, 2 TB mirrored HD. Software: Debian, KVM, virt-manager on the server with several virtual machines that use Linux too. 2 TB Disk is a big LVM, each VM gets a logical volume and makes its own partitions in that. Problem: One of the programs that runs on one of the VMs creates huge disk load. This never was an issue, because the program never ran on such a powerful hardware. Now the CPUs are fast, and lots of I/O is the result. We cant do much against that at the moment, because the tool is a black box. On the other hand, the speedy computation is welcome. The program creates about 5 GB of temp files which get overwritten during the next iteration. Question: How can we limit the disk I/O for the process?

    Read the article

  • Best Performing Remote Desktop Software for WAN

    - by Dave
    I've been tasked with connecting a computer in one of our branches in the midlands to one in south wales. We have been using windows remote desktop but find it too slow. The ADSL on the computer were connecting to is about 6Mb Download and 470Kb Upload so not majorly fast. That connection is also shared with about 10 other internet users. I'm trying to find out if the is any remote desktopn connecting software that performs better than the microsoft remote desktop software. Or, would i be better using a KVM over IP? I've looked into connecting the offices through BT's fiber optic but at £21k a year rental were trying to find a cheaper solution! Any help would be great. Thanks, Dave,

    Read the article

  • Virtual firewall to protect hypervisor

    - by manutenfruits
    I am running an Ubuntu Server 12.10 as a single host connected to a NATed router connected using PPPoE to a optical fiber modem. This server is meant to be accessed from the Internet, but also to be used from the LAN as a SVN, MySQL and what not... The issue is that the router is not customizable enough to serve, so I was thinking about creating a virtual pfSense firewall using KVM inside of the server itself, removing the need of the router. Is this possible? Can the host ignore and block all traffic coming to itself, but not for the firewall? I am aware this is not the most desirable environment, I accept suggestions based on budget!

    Read the article

  • Why is idle windows VM using so much CPU?

    - by Jeff Shattock
    I have 2 VMs running as guests on a KVM virtualization platform running on Ubuntu 10.04. One VM is an Ubuntu 10.04 system, the other is a Windows 7 system. When both machines are completely logged out, the Linux machine uses 1% CPU, the Windows one 45-50%, according to top. The graphs in virt-manager seem to back this up. Theres nothing installed on the Win7 image that would be running in the background; its as fresh as can be. Why is the Windows VM using so much more than the Linux VM, when both are logged out and idling?

    Read the article

  • How to access vm inside a vm via VNC?

    - by can.
    For some reasons I installed virtual machines inside a virtual machine, like this: A( B( C )) where A is the physical machine, B is a vm and the network type is NAT. And C is also a virtual machine and the network type is bridged. The OSes are Ubuntu 12.04 and the hypervisors are kvm. I can access B via VNC and via ssh from A, but for C I can't use ssh because C has no IP address at the start. And I assume I can only access C via VNC. I tried something like(on A): iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -d $ip-of-A -p tcp --dport 6500 -j DNAT --to-destination $ip-of-B:5900 (I referred to this) But it doesn't work. And I'm reading the man pages of iptables and hope someone could help :)

    Read the article

  • Interconnection between 2 computers in different networks.

    - by cripox
    Hi, What I want is to connect 2 computers (work and personal) primary for using a software KVM (Input Director or Synergy). Transferring files between them would be a plus. The main issue is that the work computer is in a secured enterprise network, and my personal computer is using a 3G+ modem for Internet access. On the work computer I do not have Internet access (only local network). I want to somehow connect them without to mess up either networks. I want my personal computer to not be seen in the work network. Is it possible? Suggestions: - use a simple UTP cable to connect the 2 computers with each other. Can they each be in both 2 networks without issues? - use some kind of usb cable, if exists

    Read the article

  • Instabilities with Bridged and bonded interfaces

    - by Henry-Nicolas Tourneur
    I did post yesterday to get a working setup with several bridged interfaces used for virtual machines (KVM/libvirt). One of the bridged interface is just using eth3 as its ports while the second one (public traffic) is using an ethernet bonded interface. That setup is working but not all the time ! I can start a download from a vm, then it will stop and freeze! So I don't know if my bridge parameters are correct, could you check the below config ? iface eth3 inet manual auto bond0 iface bond0 inet manual slaves eth1 eth2 pre-up ip link set bond0 up down ip link set bond0 down auto br0 iface br0 inet static address 10.160.0.7 netmask 255.255.255.128 bridge_ports eth3 bridge_fd 9 bridge_hello 2 bridge_maxage 12 bridge_stp on auto br0:1 iface br0:1 inet static address 10.160.0.9 netmask 255.255.255.255 auto br0:2 iface br0:2 inet static address 10.160.0.10 netmask 255.255.255.255 auto br1 iface br1 inet static address 217.4.40.242 netmask 255.255.255.240 gateway 217.4.40.241 pre-up /etc/network/firewall start bridge_ports bond0 bridge_fd 9 bridge_hello 2 bridge_maxage 12 bridge_stp on auto br1:1 iface br1:1 inet static address 217.4.40.252 netmask 255.255.255.255 auto br1:2 iface br1:2 inet static address 217.4.40.253 netmask 255.255.255.255 And yes, it also sometimes speaks about martian on the host: kernel: [249146.055172] martian source 10.160.0.17 from 10.160.0.10, on dev vnet2 kernel: [249146.073122] ll header: ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:54:52:00:76:c3:5c:08:06

    Read the article

  • Want to use something like Citrix XenClient, Free Alternative?

    - by Chris
    I'm looking to go into IT, general office server management, and it looks like XenClient would be a awesome tool to use. If I get it right, you would store a central image of the OS you want to deploy (in an iso file) on the main server. Then use XenClient to pull that image down to the client, and it will then boot the OS inside of the virtual machine. Does it download the image of the OS and store it locally (like cloning the VM onto the client?) I'd love to find a free (possibly open source?) alternative to this, I keep on hearing about KVM in Linux and PXE booting a minimalistic OS to use remote KVMs.... Would that be what I'm looking for? Ideally, I'd like a system.. - That allows me to manage one central image for multiple clients (virtualized hardware) - Easily push a new VM onto the client for easy updating. - Be able to keep files in sync (but that might be a samba / active directory's job) Would those things be possible with some kind of free alternative? Some guidance would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How to disable monitor auto detection in Windows 7?

    - by Jay Yother
    I am currently running Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit with a dual monitor setup with an NVIDIA 7950 GT graphics card. One monitor is dedicated to this machine and the other monitor is connected to a DVI KVM switch. When I switch to my other computer, Windows 7 disables the monitor. However, when I switch back it does not re-enable the monitor. The only circumstance that automatically re-enables the second monitor is when I switch back after Windows has put the monitors into power save mode. I am continually having to bring up the NVIDIA control panel to have it re-enable the monitor. Under Windows XP I would just disable the NVIDIA service to prevent it from auto-detecting the monitor (which doesn't solve the problem under Win7), and in Vista there was a registry hack that would prevent this. It looks as though that has been removed in Windows 7. I have found similar questions posted on this site, but nothing that matches my problem exactly. The following link is the question that comes the closest, but does not provide a solution to the problem. http://superuser.com/questions/96683/how-to-fix-monitor-detection-on-windows-7 Is there a way in Windows 7 to disable monitor auto-detection?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >