Subcategories

• Management

  VMs, hosts, pools, networks and all other usual management tasks.
  436 Topics

  3k Posts

  W

  @Pilow Lol glad I was able to help. Its only if you have a few VMs having hundreds will be a nightmare... giod luck to those that has that issue. In the meantime I will use the method I mention for now.
• Advanced features

  ACLs, Self-service, Cloud-init, Load balancing...
  97 Topics

  821 Posts

  P

  @DaleDibbadel Are you running XOA or XO from the sources? Are you up-to-date?
• Backup

  All XO backup features: full and incremental, replication, mirrors...
  446 Topics

  4k Posts

  C

  Hello @olivierlambert, @bastien-nollet, Hello Everyone !! I used vhd-cli with its new arguments and it worked ok. vhd-cli check --chain 'file:///run/xo-server/mounts/11934fec-f3a1-4f7f-a78d-00eeb1b39654?useVhdDirectory=true&encryptionKey=%22O1xt1ZTRE%5Qq%3X%3D1NZ%26%3ZZQo8%2DD%29s5xt%3OOko%22' 'xo-vm-backups/abc3e130-923e-619e-4fdc-59bcda088586/vdis/cecc4489-722a-4f79-b5e6-c050f63f2761/d489173c-028a-46f0-b712-f4a7c5594c8f/20260108T160552Z.alias.vhd' ok: xo-vm-backups/abc3e130-923e-619e-4fdc-59bcda088586/vdis/cecc4489-722a-4f79-b5e6-c050f63f2761/d489173c-028a-46f0-b712-f4a7c5594c8f/20260108T160552Z.alias.vhd But I discovered that using vhd-cli in this way only checks the physical structure of the alias.vhd file. It doesn't check the integrity of the blocks or the total number of blocks to detect a missing block. (It doesn't work like it does with huge monolithic .vhd files, where it detects errors with the slightest modification.) So I opted to split the solution: I check the integrity of the filesystem where the files are stored (using btrfs scrub). I verify that the number of blocks written in the backup is correct (that no blocks are missing). I verify that the written blocks haven't been modified since they were written. For point 2, I found (AI) that I could use "vhd-cli info" to find out the total number of blocks in the backup (I don't have much information about it), but when I run it, I get the following error. I suspect it doesn't work with (Encrypt all new data sent to this remote): vhd-cli info --chain 'file:///run/xo-server/mounts/11934fec-f3a1-4f7f-a78d-00eeb1b39654?useVhdDirectory=true&encryptionKey=%22O1xt1ZTRE%5Qq%3X%3D1NZ%26%3ZZQo8%2DD%29s5xt%3OOko%22' 'xo-vm-backups/abc3e130-923e-619e-4fdc-59bcda088586/vdis/cecc4489-722a-4f79-b5e 6-c050f63f2761/d489173c-028a-46f0-b712-f4a7c5594c8f/20260108T160552Z.alias.vhd' ✖ Unhandled remote type Error: Unhandled remote type at getHandler (/usr/lib/node_modules/vhd-cli/node_modules/@xen-orchestra/fs/dist/index.js:48:11) at getSyncedHandler (/usr/lib/node_modules/vhd-cli/node_modules/@xen-orchestra/fs/dist/index.js:54:19) at Object.info (/usr/lib/node_modules/vhd-cli/commands/info.js:98:24) at Object.runCommand (/usr/lib/node_modules/vhd-cli/index.js:32:13) at /usr/lib/node_modules/vhd-cli/node_modules/exec-promise/index.js:57:13 at new Promise (<anonymous>) at execPromise (/usr/lib/node_modules/vhd-cli/node_modules/exec-promise/index.js:56:10) at Object.<anonymous> (/usr/lib/node_modules/vhd-cli/index.js:41:1) at Module._compile (node:internal/modules/cjs/loader:1706:14) at Object..js (node:internal/modules/cjs/loader:1839:10) Could you please help me with this? I'm not sure if I'm on the right track. Perhaps there are other ways I'm missing.
• REST API

  Everything related to Xen Orchestra's REST API
  75 Topics

  572 Posts

  L

  @florent, I had to do the same for Xen Orchestra Community Edition. In my case, config.toml already contained the [authentication] section, so adding a separate config.tokenValidity.toml file did not work. Instead, I had to modify the existing config.toml located at /opt/xo/xo-server. In my opinion, it is best to keep defaultTokenValidity set to 30 days as a fallback in case no value is specified. You can then simply increase maxTokenValidity to the duration you prefer. [authentication] defaultTokenValidity = '30 days' # default value of 0.5 years # comment out and increase to 5 years #maxTokenValidity = ' 0.5 year' maxTokenValidity = '5 year'
• Infrastructure as Code

  Terraform, Packer or any tool to do IaC
  48 Topics

  436 Posts

  P

  Hi, We stumbled upon what I would call a lack of check.. or a bug ? You can create a VDI of a VM in an ISO shared SR... We did it unexpectedly. .rpc("disk.create", { name, size, sr, vm: vm.id, bootable: false, mode: "RW", }) disk.create name=<string> size=<integer|string> sr=<string> [vm=<string>] [bootable=<boolean>] [mode=<string>] [position=<string>] create a new disk on a SR this is permitted, it should not ? it was a 50Gb CIFS ISO SR, and we could create a 100GB VDI, appearing as a 100GB .img file in the SR [image: 1767881811655-69b097b3-9c28-4b97-982a-34443a199bf1-image.png] [image: 1767881827248-58d0ca02-d1be-4d49-a4bd-c90f3f4fe463-image.png] totally broken UI [image: 1767881852362-7ff52851-90b6-4845-90cd-f5190feabcbc-image.png] in DISK tab of the VM : [image: 1767881880851-62f582ab-afa7-4c29-bbd6-e83b1a73fab5-image.png] and it is really an ISO SR ! [image: 1767881925549-66fb75a7-f783-4809-ace9-e83e20722ebd-image.png] should this not be prevented ?