XCP-ng
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login
    1. Home
    2. Popular
    Log in to post
    • All Time
    • Day
    • Week
    • Month
    • All Topics
    • New Topics
    • Watched Topics
    • Unreplied Topics

    • All categories
    • D

      Tesco and XCP-ng

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved News
      16
      0 Votes
      16 Posts
      246 Views
      D
      @olivierlambert said: I'm not sure it's a great idea, because even 64 hosts is huge in terms of VMs and fallout if you have a problem on your pool DB. Even if you drastically improve the current mechanism, the impact of a problem pool wide is far bigger with 64 hosts than 24 for example. It's more than purely tech, it's also a tech design/choice. Exactly, the failure domain just grows exponentially when going beyond a certain collective pool size. I was doing some more research and I found a few possible choices that Tesco may have moved too, but don't want to detract from this forum here.
    • itservicesI

      XO Backup Error: VDI_IN_USE(OpaqueRef:.., destroy)

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Backup
      17
      2
      0 Votes
      17 Posts
      659 Views
      itservicesI
      With commit caa17 the transfer did not happen again and fails the with the known message. Regards, Marc
    • olivierlambertO

      🛰️ XO 6: dedicated thread for all your feedback!

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Xen Orchestra
      239
      7 Votes
      239 Posts
      54k Views
      acebmxerA
      Just updated to latest commit - 93909 Glade to see more progress on v6. [image: 1782149480782-screenshot-2026-06-22-133021.png]