惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

爱范儿
爱范儿
WordPress大学
WordPress大学
博客园 - 【当耐特】
The Cloudflare Blog
B
Blog
Last Week in AI
Last Week in AI
小众软件
小众软件
量子位
S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
V
Visual Studio Blog
博客园 - 叶小钗
美团技术团队
阮一峰的网络日志
阮一峰的网络日志
Hugging Face - Blog
Hugging Face - Blog
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
宝玉的分享
宝玉的分享
A
About on SuperTechFans
雷峰网
雷峰网
J
Java Code Geeks
Microsoft Azure Blog
Microsoft Azure Blog
腾讯CDC
MongoDB | Blog
MongoDB | Blog
酷 壳 – CoolShell
酷 壳 – CoolShell
Martin Fowler
Martin Fowler

Proxmox Support Forum

[SOLVED] - Github Auth for Mirrors-Kernel Repo? [Automation] Mass migration tool for MS Win11/Server Proxmox GUI hang - not response is it possible to reject or quarantine spam based on conditions I set ? The PVENode task list in PVE9 is partially obscured due to the terminal font being too large. About 100% error reporting due to pveproxy.service hooks Kubernetes overlay networking breaks when upgrading from PVE 9.1 to PVE 9.2.3 Zentraler Speicher No space left on device Combine datastore and direct file archival to tape Kernel panic VFS: Unable to mount root fs on unknown-block (0,0) sobald ein 7.x Kernel verwendet wird. How to migrate disk of a VM from one ZFS to another Windows Server 2025 fails to boot after PVE 9.2 / Linux 7.0 Kernel upgrade Cannot Install Proxmox on T610 Poweredge with H700 PERC card sdn Config. gateway not reachable How to safely change domain/FQDN? Welche Filterquote erreicht ihr? NFS Share status unknown on 2 of 5 nodes Can't connect to PVE9 consoles [solved] Can't connect to PVE9 consoles [solved] [SOLVED] - Use secondary network for PVE commands Created cluster, one node storage gone BUG: proxmox mail gateway FROM = null bypass spam filtering Moving existing PBS from VMWare workstation to PVE cluster Does eBGP SDN fabric support external peering? Bug: PDM 1.1 not recognizing valid license status Proxmox GUI hang - not response PVE crashes unexpectedly Proxmox Backup Server 4.2 released! Advice
Joining a cluster with already created guests VM
invalid@exam · 2026-05-29 · via Proxmox Support Forum

Hi

I saw a video on youtube stating that we should have no guest VM when joining a cluster. I haven't found any mention of it in the documentation.

Is it really the case ?

see: https://pve.proxmox.com/pve-docs/chapter-pvecm.html#pvecm_join_node_to_cluster

A node that is about to be added to the cluster cannot hold any guests. All existing configuration in /etc/pve is overwritten when joining a cluster, since guest IDs could be conflicting. As a workaround create a backup of the guest (vzdump) and restore it as a different ID after the node has been added to the cluster.

meaning your current cluster can have guests defined, but a node, which you add to an existing cluster has to have no guests

I hope this explains it!

I have a work-around that *might* work for you, but has not been thoroughly tested.
There is a firm requirement however that there must not be any conflicts with the guest ID, or the node name.

On node1 (with guests)
Create a new cluster or get join information.

On node2 (with guests)
scp -r /etc/pve/nodes/* to node1:/etc/pve/nodes
rm -r /etc/pve/nodes/*
Join cluster.

Please realize there is potential for things to go sideways!
I've done this to re-assemble a cluster I've recently had to pick apart, and can't provide any details on long-term issues or risk.
I cannot suggest this work-around at the moment for nodes that have never been in a cluster with each other.
I've done this with online VMs! and they remain operational through the process. The join cluster process will overwrite the contents of /etc/pve/nodes with copies from the cluster... so copying your new node directory to the cluster with scp will indirectly restore it on cluster join.

Good luck.

ph0x

Renowned Member

Sounds like a bullet proof plan, actually. :)

Yes! it works. I test it today.

I have a work-around that *might* work for you, but has not been thoroughly tested.
There is a firm requirement however that there must not be any conflicts with the guest ID, or the node name.

On node1 (with guests)
Create a new cluster or get join information.

On node2 (with guests)
scp -r /etc/pve/nodes/* to node1:/etc/pve/nodes
rm -r /etc/pve/nodes/*
Join cluster.

Please realize there is potential for things to go sideways!
I've done this to re-assemble a cluster I've recently had to pick apart, and can't provide any details on long-term issues or risk.
I cannot suggest this work-around at the moment for nodes that have never been in a cluster with each other.
I've done this with online VMs! and they remain operational through the process. The join cluster process will overwrite the contents of /etc/pve/nodes with copies from the cluster... so copying your new node directory to the cluster with scp will indirectly restore it on cluster join.

Good luck.

I have tested 2 nodes from a broken cluster and it works.

This is limitation is super frustrating.
Why can't the cluster service just check all nodes whether VM IDs are really conflicting and provide the option to change the VM IDs when there are conflicts.
Does proxmox not use UUIDs as VM IDs internally? The VM ID number should only be a display name.

This is limitation is super frustrating.
Why can't the cluster service just check all nodes whether VM IDs are really conflicting and provide the option to change the VM IDs when there are conflicts.
Does proxmox not use UUIDs as VM IDs internally? The VM ID number should only be a display name.

Are you faced with a situation you can't work around? The process for this is to add 'fresh' installations to a cluster, and not to join 2 or more pre-existing nodes together.
Personally, it was annoying for my use case. As I had to tear down the cluster and re-assemble without dropping any guests, but I'm willing to bet that's a niche situation. I'm learning ProxMox at this point and did something stupid that required the tear-down.
I'm happy with the process of encouraging adding 'fresh' hosts to a cluster rather than trying to untangle any other dependencies that may be present by trying to incorporate a host with pre-existing VMs.

Are you faced with a situation you can't work around? The process for this is to add 'fresh' installations to a cluster, and not to join 2 or more pre-existing nodes together.
Personally, it was annoying for my use case. As I had to tear down the cluster and re-assemble without dropping any guests, but I'm willing to bet that's a niche situation. I'm learning ProxMox at this point and did something stupid that required the tear-down.
I'm happy with the process of encouraging adding 'fresh' hosts to a cluster rather than trying to untangle any other dependencies that may be present by trying to incorporate a host with pre-existing VMs.

Has anyone figured out a workaround to this? The problem I am running into is that my cluster nodes are not physically close to each-other (cross-datacenter) and each node hosts a FortiGate as it's connector to the SD-WAN fabric. I don't want to join the nodes via the internet, but I don't have connectivity between them in a secure manner until the firewalls have been deployed onto the nodes.

Has anyone figured out a workaround to this? The problem I am running into is that my cluster nodes are not physically close to each-other (cross-datacenter) and each node hosts a FortiGate as it's connector to the SD-WAN fabric. I don't want to join the nodes via the internet, but I don't have connectivity between them in a secure manner until the firewalls have been deployed onto the nodes.

Unfortunately I couldn't find a reasonable workaround so I ended up having to deploy a temporary host into each colocation that housed the firewall. Rebuild the permanent node, join the cluster and then rebuild the firewall on permanent node. This was a fair amount of additional overhead (cost and effort). I'm hoping somebody can come up with a better way to do this in the future.

I have a work-around that *might* work for you, but has not been thoroughly tested.
There is a firm requirement however that there must not be any conflicts with the guest ID, or the node name.

On node1 (with guests)
Create a new cluster or get join information.

On node2 (with guests)
scp -r /etc/pve/nodes/* to node1:/etc/pve/nodes
rm -r /etc/pve/nodes/*
Join cluster.

Please realize there is potential for things to go sideways!
I've done this to re-assemble a cluster I've recently had to pick apart, and can't provide any details on long-term issues or risk.
I cannot suggest this work-around at the moment for nodes that have never been in a cluster with each other.
I've done this with online VMs! and they remain operational through the process. The join cluster process will overwrite the contents of /etc/pve/nodes with copies from the cluster... so copying your new node directory to the cluster with scp will indirectly restore it on cluster join.

Good luck.

Thanks a million

I mistakenly deleted cluster information, and I couldn't find any way to re-enable the cluster. Everything seemed lost. When I did the

all running VMs got lost from the GUI from the node, but when I was able to join to the cluster, they were back. Just in the state they were running and operational

Thanks man

Hello, how about this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z3wS6nMUtQ
Just move conf file of VMs temporarily. I consider this method just genious, until someone proves other.

Looks straightforward enough. It's still necessary to make sure VMIDs don't conflict.

I have a work-around that *might* work for you, but has not been thoroughly tested.
There is a firm requirement however that there must not be any conflicts with the guest ID, or the node name.
...
scp -r /etc/pve/nodes/* to node1:/etc/pve/nodes
rm -r /etc/pve/nodes/*
...

I broke my test cluster out of clumsiness...

But with your workaround I fixed it.
Great, thank you very much!

Has anyone figured out a workaround to this? The problem I am running into is that my cluster nodes are not physically close to each-other (cross-datacenter) and each node hosts a FortiGate as it's connector to the SD-WAN fabric. I don't want to join the nodes via the internet, but I don't have connectivity between them in a secure manner until the firewalls have been deployed onto the nodes.

Exact same use-case here: new Datacenter with 3 PVE nodes and two HA OPNSense firewalls. I would like to join the existing PVE cluster through the site2site tunnel.

The limitation of PVE not being able to join a cluster when a VM is running creates a chicken and egg problem during bootstrapping of a new environment.

Exact same use-case here: new Datacenter with 3 PVE nodes and two HA OPNSense firewalls. I would like to join the existing PVE cluster through the site2site tunnel.

The limitation of PVE not being able to join a cluster when a VM is running creates a chicken and egg problem during bootstrapping of a new environment.

Bad idea:
If your S2S Tunnel is down and you shutdown/start any VM on (The one Node), it wouldn't start because of Expected votes in the Quorum.
You cant even boot the one Proxmox node, that is behind the Tunnel. You will have to set always "pvecm expected 1" on that node to boot any VM while the Tunnel is down.

If your tunnel is created in an Opnsense-VM on that one node, you get an chicken an egg problem xD
So the tunnel needs to get created already on something other as the PVE node, like an edgerouter or something xD

But yeah, you get your node into the Cluster, which is definitively a nice way to have everything in one Cluster.
Especially with Proxmox, where the Cluster means actually nothing, just all in one GUI.
Because you can still define Failover Groups only between some Servers in the Cluster etc... (Which is actually amazing)

But yeah the Quorum thing/expected votes, is the only thing, why im not using a Custer over Tunnels.

Cheers

So having multiple PVE clusters that can always form a "local" quorum is the only reliable solution I guess?

So having multiple PVE clusters that can always form a "local" quorum is the only reliable solution I guess?

For now, yes.

We need some kind of new multi-cluster gui interface, not yet available.