toasters November 2025

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

4 participants
4 discussions

Re: Proxmox and NetApp NFS volumes
by tmac 13 Nov '25

13 Nov '25

https://docs.netapp.com/us-en/netapp-solutions-virtualization/proxmox/index… Sent from Gmail Mobile. On Fri, Nov 7, 2025 at 7:52 AM Florian Schmid via toasters < toasters(a)lists.teaparty.net> wrote: > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Florian Schmid <fschmid(a)ubimet.com> > To: toasters <toasters(a)teaparty.net> > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2025 12:52:00 +0000 > Subject: Proxmox and NetApp NFS volumes > Hello, > > we are moving to Proxmox now and I would need some help from you. > > In the past, I have always used NFSv3, because in our KVM environment, we > had issues with NFSv4.1 and head fail-overs -> VMs got paused > I think also VMware had such issues. Problem I think is that NFSv4.1 is > stateful and on a head fail-over, this state got lost. > > I'm on 9.14.1. > > As NFSv3 is quite old and Proxmox is using a newer kernel, I wanted to > ask, if someone of you have experience with Proxmox and NFS volumes from > NetApp. > > Do you use special mount options? > Is NFSv4.2 working fine with head fail-overs -> VMs are not pausing or > don't even notice it? > We have 25 Gbit network interfaces as a bond to our NetApp, are here any > special options to configure? > Are you using on VM disks "cache=none" or something different? > > Unfortunately, Proxmox has not much experience with NetApp either, so that > I hope someone from you can help me here to create a good, fast and stable > setup. > > This is how a mount point looks like with default options from Proxmox and > NFSv3: > *nfs-root-01:/pve_DC_nfs_root_01 /mnt/pve/nfs-v3-root-01 nfs > rw,relatime,vers=3,rsize=65536,wsize=65536,namlen=255,hard,proto=tcp,timeo=600,retrans=2,sec=sys,mountaddr=172.16.4.3,mountvers=3,mountport=635,mountproto=udp,local_lock=none,addr=172.16.4.3 > 0 0* > > This is from our old virtualization oVirt: > *nfs-root-01:/oVirt_DC_nfs_root_01 > /rhev/data-center/mnt/nfs-root-01:_oVirt__DC__nfs__root__01 nfs > rw,relatime,vers=3,rsize=65536,wsize=65536,namlen=255,soft,nolock,nosharecache,proto=tcp,timeo=600,retrans=6,sec=sys,mountaddr=172.16.4.3,mountvers=3,mountport=635,mountproto=udp,local_lock=all,addr=172.16.4.3 > 0 0* > > > - oVirt was using soft, but this I think, I shouldn't use on Proxmox > and instead use hard. oVirt had a special watchdog for this. > > > Best regards, > Florian > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Florian Schmid via toasters <toasters(a)lists.teaparty.net> > To: toasters <toasters(a)teaparty.net> > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2025 12:52:00 +0000 > Subject: Proxmox and NetApp NFS volumes > _______________________________________________ > toasters mailing list -- toasters(a)lists.teaparty.net > To unsubscribe send an email to toasters-leave(a)lists.teaparty.net >

3 7

Re: Proxmox and NetApp NFS volumes
by tmac 12 Nov '25

12 Nov '25

You can modify the nfs server: [-tcp-max-xfer-size <integer>] - TCP Maximum Transfer Size (bytes) (privilege: advanced) This optional parameter specifies the maximum transfer size (in bytes) that the storage system negotiates with the client for TCP transport of data for NFSv3 and NFSv4.x protocols. The range is 8192 to 1048576 Setting to the max of 1048576 will allow the client to be set to the same If your nfs client supports it, you can use “nconnect” set to 4 to also help Sent from Gmail Mobile. On Wed, Nov 12, 2025 at 5:56 AM Florian Schmid via toasters < toasters(a)lists.teaparty.net> wrote: > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Florian Schmid <fschmid(a)ubimet.com> > To: "Parisi, Justin" <Justin.Parisi(a)netapp.com> > Cc: toasters <toasters(a)teaparty.net> > Bcc: > Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 10:55:50 +0000 > Subject: Re: Proxmox and NetApp NFS volumes > Hello Justin, > > Thank you very much for your reply. > > Actually, we won't need the additional security NFSv4 would bring. > Advanced locking is also not an issue, as the VM disks are always only used > on a single node. > > Do you have any real life experience with NetApp and Proxmox using NFS? > NFSv3 has always worked for us, should we stay there? > > When using NFSv3, rsize and wsize are always at 65536. Can this be > increased and if yes, should I do this? > We have 25 Gbit from Proxmox to NetApp with MTU of 1500. > > Any other tweaks here: > rw,relatime,vers=3,rsize=65536,wsize=65536,namlen=255,hard,proto=tcp,timeo=600,retrans=2,sec=sys,mountaddr=172.16.4.3,mountvers=3,mountport=635,mountproto=udp,local_lock=none,addr=172.16.4.3 > 0 0 > > Best regards, > Flo > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Parisi, Justin <Justin.Parisi(a)netapp.com> > *Sent:* Monday, 10 November 2025 16:10 > *To:* tmac <tmacmd(a)gmail.com>; Florian Schmid <fschmid(a)ubimet.com> > *Cc:* toasters <toasters(a)teaparty.net> > *Subject:* RE: Proxmox and NetApp NFS volumes > > > With any move from NFSv3 to NFSv4.x, you have to take into consideration > the major changes in how the protocols work. In a virt use case, you mainly > would care most about the change in stateful vs. stateless, where storage > failovers could introduce more delay/disruption in NFSv4.x than v3, due to > locks and states. NFSv4.2 has no mount options avoiding this, but you can > tune some of the lock grace periods on the SVM if needed. > > > > TR-4067 covers the differences in the protocol versions on page 42 and has > some information about nondisruptive operations on page 63. > > > > https://www.netapp.com/pdf.html?item=/media/10720-tr-4067.pdf > > > > While NFSv3 is indeed old, it is still very viable for most use cases, > provided you don’t require the added security or locking benefits in > NFSv4.x. > > > > *From:* tmac <tmacmd(a)gmail.com> > *Sent:* Friday, November 7, 2025 10:32 PM > *To:* Florian Schmid <fschmid(a)ubimet.com> > *Cc:* toasters <toasters(a)teaparty.net> > *Subject:* Re: Proxmox and NetApp NFS volumes > > > > *EXTERNAL EMAIL - USE CAUTION when clicking links or attachments * > > > > > https://docs.netapp.com/us-en/netapp-solutions-virtualization/proxmox/index… > <https://docs.netapp.com/us-en/netapp-solutions-virtualization/proxmox/index…> > > > > > Sent from Gmail Mobile. > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 7, 2025 at 7:52 AM Florian Schmid via toasters < > toasters(a)lists.teaparty.net> wrote: > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Florian Schmid <fschmid(a)ubimet.com> > To: toasters <toasters(a)teaparty.net> > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2025 12:52:00 +0000 > Subject: Proxmox and NetApp NFS volumes > > Hello, > > > > we are moving to Proxmox now and I would need some help from you. > > > > In the past, I have always used NFSv3, because in our KVM environment, we > had issues with NFSv4.1 and head fail-overs -> VMs got paused > > I think also VMware had such issues. Problem I think is that NFSv4.1 is > stateful and on a head fail-over, this state got lost. > > > > I'm on 9.14.1. > > > > As NFSv3 is quite old and Proxmox is using a newer kernel, I wanted to > ask, if someone of you have experience with Proxmox and NFS volumes from > NetApp. > > > > Do you use special mount options? > > Is NFSv4.2 working fine with head fail-overs -> VMs are not pausing or > don't even notice it? > > We have 25 Gbit network interfaces as a bond to our NetApp, are here any > special options to configure? > > Are you using on VM disks "cache=none" or something different? > > > > Unfortunately, Proxmox has not much experience with NetApp either, so that > I hope someone from you can help me here to create a good, fast and stable > setup. > > > > This is how a mount point looks like with default options from Proxmox and > NFSv3: > > *nfs-root-01:/pve_DC_nfs_root_01 /mnt/pve/nfs-v3-root-01 nfs > rw,relatime,vers=3,rsize=65536,wsize=65536,namlen=255,hard,proto=tcp,timeo=600,retrans=2,sec=sys,mountaddr=172.16.4.3,mountvers=3,mountport=635,mountproto=udp,local_lock=none,addr=172.16.4.3 > 0 0* > > > > This is from our old virtualization oVirt: > > *nfs-root-01:/oVirt_DC_nfs_root_01 > /rhev/data-center/mnt/nfs-root-01:_oVirt__DC__nfs__root__01 nfs > rw,relatime,vers=3,rsize=65536,wsize=65536,namlen=255,soft,nolock,nosharecache,proto=tcp,timeo=600,retrans=6,sec=sys,mountaddr=172.16.4.3,mountvers=3,mountport=635,mountproto=udp,local_lock=all,addr=172.16.4.3 > 0 0* > > > > - oVirt was using soft, but this I think, I shouldn't use on Proxmox > and instead use hard. oVirt had a special watchdog for this. > > > > Best regards, > > Florian > > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Florian Schmid via toasters <toasters(a)lists.teaparty.net> > To: toasters <toasters(a)teaparty.net> > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2025 12:52:00 +0000 > Subject: Proxmox and NetApp NFS volumes > _______________________________________________ > toasters mailing list -- toasters(a)lists.teaparty.net > To unsubscribe send an email to toasters-leave(a)lists.teaparty.net > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Florian Schmid via toasters <toasters(a)lists.teaparty.net> > To: "Parisi, Justin" <Justin.Parisi(a)netapp.com> > Cc: toasters <toasters(a)teaparty.net> > Bcc: > Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 10:55:50 +0000 > Subject: Re: Proxmox and NetApp NFS volumes > _______________________________________________ > toasters mailing list -- toasters(a)lists.teaparty.net > To unsubscribe send an email to toasters-leave(a)lists.teaparty.net >

1 0

Proxmox and NetApp NFS volumes
by Florian Schmid 07 Nov '25

07 Nov '25

Hello, we are moving to Proxmox now and I would need some help from you. In the past, I have always used NFSv3, because in our KVM environment, we had issues with NFSv4.1 and head fail-overs -> VMs got paused I think also VMware had such issues. Problem I think is that NFSv4.1 is stateful and on a head fail-over, this state got lost. I'm on 9.14.1. As NFSv3 is quite old and Proxmox is using a newer kernel, I wanted to ask, if someone of you have experience with Proxmox and NFS volumes from NetApp. Do you use special mount options? Is NFSv4.2 working fine with head fail-overs -> VMs are not pausing or don't even notice it? We have 25 Gbit network interfaces as a bond to our NetApp, are here any special options to configure? Are you using on VM disks "cache=none" or something different? Unfortunately, Proxmox has not much experience with NetApp either, so that I hope someone from you can help me here to create a good, fast and stable setup. This is how a mount point looks like with default options from Proxmox and NFSv3: nfs-root-01:/pve_DC_nfs_root_01 /mnt/pve/nfs-v3-root-01 nfs rw,relatime,vers=3,rsize=65536,wsize=65536,namlen=255,hard,proto=tcp,timeo=600,retrans=2,sec=sys,mountaddr=172.16.4.3,mountvers=3,mountport=635,mountproto=udp,local_lock=none,addr=172.16.4.3 0 0 This is from our old virtualization oVirt: nfs-root-01:/oVirt_DC_nfs_root_01 /rhev/data-center/mnt/nfs-root-01:_oVirt__DC__nfs__root__01 nfs rw,relatime,vers=3,rsize=65536,wsize=65536,namlen=255,soft,nolock,nosharecache,proto=tcp,timeo=600,retrans=6,sec=sys,mountaddr=172.16.4.3,mountvers=3,mountport=635,mountproto=udp,local_lock=all,addr=172.16.4.3 0 0 * oVirt was using soft, but this I think, I shouldn't use on Proxmox and instead use hard. oVirt had a special watchdog for this. Best regards, Florian

1 0

How the Palo Alto NGFW-Engineer Exam Can Fast-Track Your Security Career
by ameliapk525＠gmail.com 03 Nov '25

03 Nov '25

Want to supercharge your cybersecurity career? The Palo Alto Networks NGFW-Engineer Exam is your golden ticket to becoming a certified Next-Gen Firewall expert, unlocking high-demand roles like Cloud Security Architect, Senior Network Defender, or Threat Prevention Specialist—with top-tier salaries to match! While mastering Panorama, Zero Trust, and advanced threat hunting isn’t a walk in the park, P2Pexams’ NGFW-Engineer Practice Tests turn your prep into a power-up, delivering real-world attack simulations, brain-melting troubleshooting drills, and cheat-code-level explanations that transform you into a Palo Alto pro before you even hit the exam room. Game on—your next promotion is waiting! Read More Visit: https://www.p2pexams.com/palo-alto-networks/pdf/ngfw-engineer

2 1

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

toasters November 2025