Hi everyone,

I just installed this 8.2.1 a Dell R630 and the installer was very smooth.
We chose to make a new installation since the host was running XS 7.2 and we wanted a fresh install, with that came the opportunity to leverage EXT and thin provisioning which seems to work just as it should.

We're also mounting a NFS SR for VM disks which works fine as well. I'll have to wait and see, but hopefully the problem with /var/log/snmpd.log is resolved now and no more alerts regarding disk usage

We're using Veeam for our VMware platform and XOA for our XCP platform and I have to say I prefer XOA. Why may one ask?
Well it is dead simple, its not bloated, you have a ton of options when it comes to configuration, destination, scheduling and so on.

Veeam on the other hand is A LOT faster, we're using a 10G link to our backup site and we're seeing speeds over 7Gbit/s when backing up our VMware platform and I know this is something Vates is working hard on improving in XOA.
Veeam also has application aware backups which is a big deal when you're running MSSQL inside your VM's - I dont think there is any plans from Vates in supporting this and this might be a big deal for customers comming from the VMware and Veeam-side.

According to Microsoft you need to use their built in backup feature or a software that supports AD and VSS which will tell the VM OS that it is going to be backed up.
Unless you do this there might be corruption of the AD Databases according to Microsoft.

ALL THO we've been backing up our AD servers with XOA snapshots (Both normal backup and incremental) and had only 1 issue since we started using XOA in 2016.
Since that issue we also use a guest agent (From Ahsay CBS) that makes a Windows System State backup and Windows System Backup.

More info about that can be found here:

https://wiki.ahsay.com/doku.php?id=public:version_9:client:9447_system_state_backup_vs_system_backup

A great opportunity for anyone who is into xcp, xoa and opensource software to join a great company

@olivierlambert said in XCP-ng 8.2.1 (maintenance update) - ready for testing:

Thanks a lot @nikade for your feedback! (also I love your avatar!)

Yeah, I gotta have my suit on my tux

I wanted to inform that I've tried iSCSI with multipathing as well and it works fine.
So far everything we need in our general production-environment seems to be working as it should.

@planedrop said in XO - Restore Health Check:

I can confirm this is the case for me too, not a huge deal, but would be kinda nice if it could keep track of the name.

Thanks for verifying, it is probably an easy fix for the vates ppl

Hi everyone,

Has anyone else tried the Restore Health Check-feature in XO to test their backups?
I've used it now in my lab a couple of times and it works great, but one thing that bugs me out is that the name of the tested VM is no longer dispalyed after the TEST is finished because it was removed:

Instead of listing the name of the VM it just says "VM not found!"

We're using XO from sources:

Xen Orchestra, commit 8b7e1
Master, commit 587da

@Dataslak said in After installing updates: 0 bytes free, Control domain memory = 0B:

@nikade @olivierlambert @stormi @Danp @yann

Just wanted to say to you all:

Thank you for your contributions and kind helpful assistance which has helped me through this crisis.

I would have been in deep trouble without you. I respect your expertise, and appreciate deeply that you are working so hard to help us dumb users. I have learned a lot, and hope one day to become skilled enough to at least help other new users on this forum.

Best wishes
Aslak

Happy everything worked out, this is what this community is all about.
I've gotten a lot of help and given some too, it's all about helping out with the things that you can.
With time you'll be able to help out more and more and more

@planedrop said in Veeam and XCP-ng:

@jasonnix I've done extensive testing with this myself, first and foremost, Veeam is the one that would have to support it, not vice versa.

Second, it would be best to use XO for the backups, it's much more fluid and is fully integrated, I've been doing this for some time and it's been excellent in multiple production setups.

I also have tested using Veeam via agents within the VMs themselves (this was just for test purposes, I'd still not really recommend it) and it worked exactly as expected.

Using XO for this is still better though, it's generally faster, easier to setup, more reliable, and much faster and easier to recover from backups.

If you are considering this as a comparison to VMware, it's worth noting that it's not really a positive thing that VMware requires you buy a separate product entirely in order to handle backups.

Well said, I totally agree.

@BHellman said in Let's Test the HA:

Disclaimer: I work for LINBIT, makers of DRBD and LINSTOR the tech behind XOSTOR.

We can do highly available iscsi targets, we even have guides on our website that take you step by step to do it. These would be outside of XCP-NG, but would serve the same purpose.

If there is any interest from Vates to integrate DRBD/HA into XCP-NG, we're always open to discussions.

Sounds interesting for pretty much everyone comming from VMware vSAN running SQL Server in a failover-cluster if im allowed to jump the gun

What NIC do you have in your servers @cairoti ?

Is the VM on shared storage?
Storage migration is quite slow, but if the VM is on shared storage the migration is usually pretty quick, we've seen about 7Gbit/s on a 10G network with MTU 9000.

@syscon-chrisl OK that's another story, totally weird.
It should totally work if the networking is correct, we've done this at work many times (Migrating from 1G to 10G NIC for example).

@syscon-chrisl OK - So you just changed the mgmt interface to another physical NIC?
That should definately work, did you have any ip configuration on any other interface?

Changing the mgmt interface on a pool is nothing I have good experience from, but on a stand alone host it is rather easy:

Make sure that the new interface is connected and has the correct VLAN, if you're using DHCP it will automatically grab an IP. If not you'll have to go on the console and configure the IP manually after changing the interface.

One thing I learned over the years with XenServer and now XCP-NG:
Don't change anything, if you have a pool all hosts needs to have the same specs on their NIC, make sure to sync the clock with NTP, dont use DHCP and dont mess with iptables or similar since it will mess upp XAPI.

From the error message I'd say you have missed some vital part, like what does a traceroute or ping from the XCP-NG to the host look like? Can you telnet the destination and port?
I know the traceroute binary isn't present but you can install it from epel repo's.

@fred974 said in How to pass MAC address to pfSense VM:

@nikade do you use 2 IP subnet? 1x for xcp-ng management + ssh and another extra that you use for the VMs or is it all 1 single subnet? Also did you requested separate MAC on Hetzner backend or left it as is?

@nikade said in How to pass MAC address to pfSense VM:

We then enabled forwarding on the xcp-ng host and setup the first usable IP as "local" subnet

How did you achieve this? Thank you very much in advance. I really appreciate the feedback..

1 IPv4 on the dom0, the one that came with the server. Then we ordered a /29 IPv4 subnet which is routed to the dom0 IPv4 address.
You then need to setup IPv4 forwarding on the dom0 by editing the sysctl and then setup the 1st usable IPv4 from the /29 IPv4 subnet on an internal interface.

I just created a dummy vlan interface and put it there and that worked fine.

Used Hetzner many times with xcp-ng and pfsense, we ordered a subnet which was routed to the xcp-ng host.
We then enabled forwarding on the xcp-ng host and setup the first usable IP as "local" subnet and then we were able to use the rest of the IP's on our VM's using that first IP as default gateway.

@planedrop said in Backup / Migration Performance:

@KPS Regarding the 2TiB limitation, it'll definitely be nice when we have SMAPIv3 so we can go over this, but it's worth noting that IMO no VMs should be larger than this anyway. Generally speaking if you need that kind of space it'd be better to just use a NAS/iSCSI setup. Something like TrueNAS can delivery that at high speed, and then handle it's own backups and replication of it.

I know most probably already know this, and all environments are different (I manage one that requires a 7TiB local disk, at least for the time being, plan is to migrate it to a NAS once the software vendor supports it), but it's worth noting anytime I see the 2TiB limit come up, ideally it should be architected around so the VMs are nimble.

I do something similar w/ a pretty massive SMB share and TrueNAS can back this up at whatever speed the WAN can handle, in my case 2 gigabits and it'll maintain that 2 gigabit upload for 8+ hours without slowing down. (and I'm confident even 10 gigabit would be possible with this box)

We have 1 exception and that is for Windows file servers which is backing our DFS.
Except from those we dont allow VM's larger than 1Tb and if they're that big we do not back them up because it usually breaks and cause all kinds of problems.

@Greg_E yeah I can imagine, I dont think the ram does much except gives you some "margins" under some heavier load. With 12 VM's I wouldn't bother increasing it from the default values

Yea the mgmt interface in ESXi is nice, I think the standalone interface is almost better than vCenter. Im pretty sure XO Lite will be able to do more when it is done, for example you'll be able to manage a small pool with it.