The value for apm is disabled on all disks but this doesn't work. The "Jinja error" still exists but it worked with omv7 before.
And I can't do this setting for the NVMe or SSDs as it is not possible.
The value for apm is disabled on all disks but this doesn't work. The "Jinja error" still exists but it worked with omv7 before.
And I can't do this setting for the NVMe or SSDs as it is not possible.
I tried to edit the parameters for example for one disk on "/storage/disks" for spindown time/enabling write cache and when I try to apply the "pending configuration change" omv throws an error:
- OMV8 has all latest updates installed
Failed to execute command 'export PATH=/bin:/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/local/sbin; export LC_ALL=C.UTF-8; export LANGUAGE=; omv-salt deploy run --no-color smartmontools 2>&1' with exit code '1': debian:
Data failed to compile:
----------
Rendering SLS 'base:omv.deploy.smartmontools.20hdparm' failed: Jinja error: apm: The value 255 is bigger than 254.
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/lib/python3.10/site-packages/salt/utils/templates.py", line 469, in render_jinja_tmpl
output = template.render(**decoded_context)
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/lib/python3.10/site-packages/jinja2/environment.py", line 1295, in render
self.environment.handle_exception()
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/lib/python3.10/site-packages/jinja2/environment.py", line 942, in handle_exception
raise rewrite_traceback_stack(source=source)
File "<template>", line 26, in top-level template code
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/lib/python3.10/site-packages/jinja2/sandbox.py", line 401, in call
return __context.call(__obj, *args, **kwargs)
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/lib/python3.10/site-packages/salt/loader/lazy.py", line 162, in __call__
ret = self.loader.run(run_func, *args, **kwargs)
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/lib/python3.10/site-packages/salt/loader/lazy.py", line 1287, in run
return self._last_context.run(self._run_as, _func_or_method, *args, **kwargs)
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/lib/python3.10/site-packages/salt/loader/lazy.py", line 1302, in _run_as
ret = _func_or_method(*args, **kwargs)
File "/var/cache/salt/minion/extmods/modules/omv_conf.py", line 41, in get
objs = db.get(id_, identifier)
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/extras-3.10/openmediavault/config/database.py", line 85, in get
query.execute()
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/extras-3.10/openmediavault/config/database.py", line 735, in execute
self._response = self._elements_to_object(elements)
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/extras-3.10/openmediavault/config/database.py", line 481, in _elements_to_object
obj.validate()
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/extras-3.10/openmediavault/config/object.py", line 236, in validate
self.model.validate(self.get_dict())
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/extras-3.10/openmediavault/config/datamodel.py", line 202, in validate
self.schema.validate(data)
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/extras-3.10/openmediavault/json/schema.py", line 175, in validate
self._validate_type(value, schema, name)
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/extras-3.10/openmediavault/json/schema.py", line 230, in _validate_type
raise last_exception
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/extras-3.10/openmediavault/json/schema.py", line 201, in _validate_type
self._validate_object(value, schema, name)
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/extras-3.10/openmediavault/json/schema.py", line 306, in _validate_object
self._check_properties(value, schema, name)
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/extras-3.10/openmediavault/json/schema.py", line 522, in _check_properties
self._validate_type(value[propk], propv, path)
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/extras-3.10/openmediavault/json/schema.py", line 230, in _validate_type
raise last_exception
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/extras-3.10/openmediavault/json/schema.py", line 204, in _validate_type
self._validate_integer(value, schema, name)
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/extras-3.10/openmediavault/json/schema.py", line 254, in _validate_integer
self._check_maximum(value, schema, name)
File "/opt/saltstack/salt/extras-3.10/openmediavault/json/schema.py", line 328, in _check_maximum
raise SchemaValidationException(
openmediavault.json.schema.SchemaValidationException: apm: The value 255 is bigger than 254.
; line 26
Display More
....
Sorry I was a bit confused about the status of zfs plugin / running kernel and the same error messages about not to be able to build zfs modules on kernel 6.14, so I did the following things:
- removed all kernel sources > 6.8x
- removed all linux packages with status "rc"
- removed zfs plugin
- reinstalled kernel 6.17.4
- reinstalled zfs plugin
- after first reinstall and comit in omv gui zfs plugin throws "rcp error"
- reinstalled zfs plugin again - was shown as "not installed"
- commit once again in omv gui to configuration changes
- now plugin is working
- rebooted
- did a "zpool import" to get all pools again
- rebooted
hmm after running the script new errors are thrown during the running on zfs-dkms. Now the deinstallation of "omv-zfs" plugin and reinstallation fails.
Building initial module zfs/2.3.5 for 6.14.11-5-pve
Sign command: /lib/modules/6.14.11-5-pve/build/scripts/sign-file
Signing key: /var/lib/dkms/mok.key
Public certificate (MOK): /var/lib/dkms/mok.pub
Running the pre_build script.................... done.
Building module(s)...(bad exit status: 2)
Failed command:
make -j6 KERNELRELEASE=6.14.11-5-pve
Error! Bad return status for module build on kernel: 6.14.11-5-pve (x86_64)
Consult /var/lib/dkms/zfs/2.3.5/build/make.log for more information.
Ok where to find "fix7to8upgrade" script? A pvekernel.source is saved in /etc/apt/sources.list.d
cat /etc/apt/sources.list.d/pvekernel.sources
Types: deb
URIs: http://download.proxmox.com/debian/pve
Suites: trixie
Components: pve-no-subscription
Signed-By: /usr/share/keyrings/proxmox-archive-keyring.gpg
Hmm ok, how to manually fix and check if something got wrong during the upgrade vom 7 to 8?
Just manually installed newer pve kernel 6.14 and it's working now and all other updates are installing. Older kernel was 6.11 maybe from omv7.
Just tried to install all latest updates for OMV8 / OMV8 Plugins and got depency update problemss with "omv-zfs-provider-pve:amd64=8.0.0"
1. omv-zfs-provider-pve:amd64=8.0.0 is selected for install
2. omv-zfs-provider-pve:amd64 Depends proxmox-headers-6.14 | proxmox-headers-6.17
but none of the choices are installable:
[no choices]
The system was upgraded from omv7 to omv8 some days before. Some way to fix the depencies?
Failed to execute command 'export PATH=/bin:/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/local/sbin; export LC_ALL=C.UTF-8; export LANGUAGE=; omv-salt deploy run --no-color zfs 2>&1' with exit code '1': fj720q-db-omv7.fritz.box:
----------
ID: zfs_provider_install_selected
Function: pkg.installed
Name: omv-zfs-provider-pve
Result: False
Comment: Problem encountered installing package(s). Additional info follows:
errors:
- Running as unit: run-ra0fcbd1104204386adeff751b9cbbddf.scope; invocation ID: d4c6e80473774492aeb0a1bf566c527b
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
E: The following information from --solver 3.0 may provide additional context:
Unable to satisfy dependencies. Reached two conflicting decisions:
1. omv-zfs-provider-pve:amd64=8.0.0 is selected for install
2. omv-zfs-provider-pve:amd64 Depends proxmox-headers-6.14 | proxmox-headers-6.17
but none of the choices are installable:
[no choices]
Started: 09:21:27.546037
Duration: 2838.035 ms
Changes:
----------
ID: zfs_provider_remove_other
Function: pkg.removed
Name: omv-zfs-provider-dkms
Result: False
Comment: One or more requisite failed: omv.deploy.zfs.default.zfs_provider_install_selected
Started: 09:21:30.384402
Duration: 0.003 ms
Changes:
----------
ID: zfs_provider_purge_dkms_bits
Function: pkg.removed
Result: False
Comment: One or more requisite failed: omv.deploy.zfs.default.zfs_provider_install_selected
Started: 09:21:30.384508
Duration: 0.002 ms
Changes:
----------
ID: zfs_provider_pve_apt_pin
Function: file.managed
Name: /etc/apt/preferences.d/omv-zfs-pve.pref
Result: False
Comment: One or more requisite failed: omv.deploy.zfs.default.zfs_provider_install_selected
Started: 09:21:30.385927
Duration: 0.003 ms
Changes:
----------
ID: zfs_provider_verify_pve_module
Function: cmd.run
Name: modinfo -k $(uname -r) zfs >/dev/null
Result: False
Comment: One or more requisite failed: omv.deploy.zfs.default.zfs_provider_install_selected
Started: 09:21:30.395909
Duration: 0.004 ms
Changes:
Summary for fj720q-db-omv7.fritz.box
------------
Succeeded: 0
Failed: 5
------------
Total states run: 5
Total run time: 2.838 s
[ERROR ] Command 'systemd-run' failed with return code: 100
[ERROR ] stdout: Reading package lists...
Building dependency tree...
Reading state information...
Solving dependencies...
Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
or been moved out of Incoming.
The following information may help to resolve the situation:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
omv-zfs-provider-pve : Depends: proxmox-headers-6.14 but it is not installable or
proxmox-headers-6.17 but it is not installable
Depends: proxmox-kernel-6.14 but it is not installable or
proxmox-kernel-6.17 but it is not installable
[ERROR ] stderr: Running as unit: run-ra0fcbd1104204386adeff751b9cbbddf.scope; invocation ID: d4c6e80473774492aeb0a1bf566c527b
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
E: The following information from --solver 3.0 may provide additional context:
Unable to satisfy dependencies. Reached two conflicting decisions:
1. omv-zfs-provider-pve:amd64=8.0.0 is selected for install
2. omv-zfs-provider-pve:amd64 Depends proxmox-headers-6.14 | proxmox-headers-6.17
but none of the choices are installable:
[no choices]
[ERROR ] retcode: 100
[ERROR ] Problem encountered installing package(s). Additional info follows:
errors:
- Running as unit: run-ra0fcbd1104204386adeff751b9cbbddf.scope; invocation ID: d4c6e80473774492aeb0a1bf566c527b
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
E: The following information from --solver 3.0 may provide additional context:
Unable to satisfy dependencies. Reached two conflicting decisions:
1. omv-zfs-provider-pve:amd64=8.0.0 is selected for install
2. omv-zfs-provider-pve:amd64 Depends proxmox-headers-6.14 | proxmox-headers-6.17
but none of the choices are installable:
[no choices]
OMV\ExecException: Failed to execute command 'export PATH=/bin:/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/local/sbin; export LC_ALL=C.UTF-8; export LANGUAGE=; omv-salt deploy run --no-color zfs 2>&1' with exit code '1': fj720q-db-omv7.fritz.box:
----------
ID: zfs_provider_install_selected
Function: pkg.installed
Name: omv-zfs-provider-pve
Result: False
Comment: Problem encountered installing package(s). Additional info follows:
errors:
- Running as unit: run-ra0fcbd1104204386adeff751b9cbbddf.scope; invocation ID: d4c6e80473774492aeb0a1bf566c527b
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
E: The following information from --solver 3.0 may provide additional context:
Unable to satisfy dependencies. Reached two conflicting decisions:
1. omv-zfs-provider-pve:amd64=8.0.0 is selected for install
2. omv-zfs-provider-pve:amd64 Depends proxmox-headers-6.14 | proxmox-headers-6.17
but none of the choices are installable:
[no choices]
Started: 09:21:27.546037
Duration: 2838.035 ms
Changes:
----------
ID: zfs_provider_remove_other
Function: pkg.removed
Name: omv-zfs-provider-dkms
Result: False
Comment: One or more requisite failed: omv.deploy.zfs.default.zfs_provider_install_selected
Started: 09:21:30.384402
Duration: 0.003 ms
Changes:
----------
ID: zfs_provider_purge_dkms_bits
Function: pkg.removed
Result: False
Comment: One or more requisite failed: omv.deploy.zfs.default.zfs_provider_install_selected
Started: 09:21:30.384508
Duration: 0.002 ms
Changes:
----------
ID: zfs_provider_pve_apt_pin
Function: file.managed
Name: /etc/apt/preferences.d/omv-zfs-pve.pref
Result: False
Comment: One or more requisite failed: omv.deploy.zfs.default.zfs_provider_install_selected
Started: 09:21:30.385927
Duration: 0.003 ms
Changes:
----------
ID: zfs_provider_verify_pve_module
Function: cmd.run
Name: modinfo -k $(uname -r) zfs >/dev/null
Result: False
Comment: One or more requisite failed: omv.deploy.zfs.default.zfs_provider_install_selected
Started: 09:21:30.395909
Duration: 0.004 ms
Changes:
Summary for fj720q-db-omv7.fritz.box
------------
Succeeded: 0
Failed: 5
------------
Total states run: 5
Total run time: 2.838 s
[ERROR ] Command 'systemd-run' failed with return code: 100
[ERROR ] stdout: Reading package lists...
Building dependency tree...
Reading state information...
Solving dependencies...
Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
or been moved out of Incoming.
The following information may help to resolve the situation:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
omv-zfs-provider-pve : Depends: proxmox-headers-6.14 but it is not installable or
proxmox-headers-6.17 but it is not installable
Depends: proxmox-kernel-6.14 but it is not installable or
proxmox-kernel-6.17 but it is not installable
[ERROR ] stderr: Running as unit: run-ra0fcbd1104204386adeff751b9cbbddf.scope; invocation ID: d4c6e80473774492aeb0a1bf566c527b
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
E: The following information from --solver 3.0 may provide additional context:
Unable to satisfy dependencies. Reached two conflicting decisions:
1. omv-zfs-provider-pve:amd64=8.0.0 is selected for install
2. omv-zfs-provider-pve:amd64 Depends proxmox-headers-6.14 | proxmox-headers-6.17
but none of the choices are installable:
[no choices]
[ERROR ] retcode: 100
[ERROR ] Problem encountered installing package(s). Additional info follows:
errors:
- Running as unit: run-ra0fcbd1104204386adeff751b9cbbddf.scope; invocation ID: d4c6e80473774492aeb0a1bf566c527b
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
E: The following information from --solver 3.0 may provide additional context:
Unable to satisfy dependencies. Reached two conflicting decisions:
1. omv-zfs-provider-pve:amd64=8.0.0 is selected for install
2. omv-zfs-provider-pve:amd64 Depends proxmox-headers-6.14 | proxmox-headers-6.17
but none of the choices are installable:
[no choices] in /usr/share/php/openmediavault/system/process.inc:247
Display More
Thanks for the tip. I then exported the VM ZFS volume to qcow2 and temporarily formatted the external disc with ext4. I have also informed myself once again that ZFS on USB is not a good idea.
Yes the wiping was successfull
And yes temporary I have to use zfs on usb discs to get other discs free for reorganisation and redesign of disc drive layout.
I will check and maybe do the pool creation once again with the parameters omv uses. On my creation no parametes were used shown in history.
Yes that's correct. I "wiped" the two discs within the storage plugin and get back to the zfs plugin and they were not listed in the drop down field for usable discs. So I created the pool on the command line and the auto refresh in the plugin now showed the new pool so I created the filesystems with the zfs plugin.
Hi there, I would like to use the zfs plugin to create more than one pool with datasets/volumes on different discs. Actually one pool with datasets/volumes is already created and I added two new discs to the server.
So I tried to create a different new pool but the "devices" drop down field stays "empty". The two new discs are "empty", all partitions were deleted. So "normally" it should be possible to create new pool on one to many discs.
Is this a "bug"? For now I will create the new zfs pools on the command line without plugin.
I had a similar problem and had deactivated the backports. I then installed the 6.1.0-33-amd64 kernel - not the Proxmox kernel.
However, after some searching I found that my ‘sources.list’ was not complete and therefore the appropriate packages could not be found because the corresponding requirement for ZFS was not configured.
ALT
deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bookworm main
deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bookworm main
# bookworm-updates, to get updates before a point release is made;
# see https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch02.en.html#_updates_and_backports
deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bookworm-updates main contrib non-free
deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bookworm-updates main contrib non-free
NEW
deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bookworm main contrib non-free
deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bookworm main contrib non-free
# bookworm-updates, to get updates before a point release is made;
# see https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch02.en.html#_updates_and_backports
deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bookworm-updates main contrib non-free
deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian/ bookworm-updates main contrib non-free
I was then able to install the missing package ‘zfs-dkms’ so that the ZFS modules could be built to match my kernel. The kernel sources must of course also be installed beforehand.
The ZFS service ‘zfs-zed’, which previously could not start due to a lack of kernel modules, then also worked.
However, this means that different licence types are used and this is displayed accordingly during the installation.
I can now test again whether this also works with the backport kernel.
No the copy of the container data and the information about the container/version is already copied and backuped by my own skript. The only missing part is the automatic registration/Sync of the yml file with the compose GUI data or import of docker compose data.
Syncing of the compose folder is done via rsync.
Would it be possible just to fill in the drop down field with one default entry if there is only "one" device available?
Actually my installations have only one "br0" interface shown under "device" and there could be a default entry which is not "blank".
Hi there, I am using two pcs for OMV7, one productiv and one as "cold standby" server for my docker environement and I do not want to use docker swarm as ha solution because both pcs are several kilometres apart and only connected via VPN (DSL etc. not enough bandwidth.
So for now I am syncronising backups of docker data and compose files and doing the manual way in OMV / Compose Plugin in "Sync changes from file" or "Import" docker compose yml files to the GUI. Everything else is done via self written skript in backing up dockerdata / container information / compose file and restoring this once per day on the cold standby site.
To automate the re(registration) of new or changed docker compose files during the rsync sync it would be nice, if there would be a command line syntax available to use for this steps. Or maybe another way for automating this is possible.
Is it possible to use some command line syntax in a bash file that is also generated from the gui plugin during using these commands "Sync changes from file" or "Import / Import one" docker compose file?
Or some way to do a complete backup for restoring this like a bare metal desaster recovery on another OVM installation that is same version?
Hi there, would it be possible to set a persistent network interface in the wol plugin? Actually when I want to sent a wol package everytime I have to select a interface from which to sent but there is only one interface configured to use in the drop down field.
So just for the usage it would be one selection less - select the configured device, click on "send" and here you go - finished ![]()
Ok so everything is fine, it was a little confusing for me. ![]()
Ok actually no issue just the question as I said it is a little confusing to install newer and two kernel headers for the running kernel as normally only the corresponding kernel headers should be installed.
On my "old" hardware the newest kernel 6.8 has the problem with some new default when using "virtiommu" active in bios. So I did not found during searching some forums if there would be some performance impact if I disable virtiommu" in bios of the server.
Hi there, I just installed the proxmox 6.5 kernel on my hp microserver gen8. During installation I saw that both kernel headers for 6.5 and 6.8 got installed. Normally this is not necessary because headers for 6.8 are only for kernel 6.8.
Is this a "bug" in the depency check during installation?