@dinhngtu No i did not. Right now I'm running as is...seems to work fine.

@stormi I am glad to hear there is progress, and I never doubted that there was interest and will from the Dev team, it was just stated, by Oliver himself, that the focus was mostly on the classic hypervisor features and that resources for edge cases were scarce. The numbers might not be spot on, but it was something similar.. Anyways I know you care and that the team always take interest in home-lab scenarios. And that, is why I keep recommending XCP-ng. You are good and motivated people, you care and interact with the community and you have a product that is simple in structure and free of most of the technical bureaucracy that the other ecosystems have. And yes, this particular Intel Arc issue, is not only on XCP-ng, The intel toolbox and drivers for this platform is currently a mess for Linux. And you are right to take home-labbers under your wing and prioritize it. As I'm sure you know, although it might not be of direct importance for revenue, they do have a huge impact on popularity. I dont think Proxmox would have had the traction it has, without them Thank you for replying, and thank you to the team for their hard work!

@john.c We currently dont use ipv6 internally. No network changes were made at this location other then moving the proxy to the correct network for nbd connections. With that move some how made the ipv6 issue appear. So it was just easy to disable ipv6 in the proxy. I guess if we ever switch to ipv6 (no plans too) then i guess i will have to look back into it.

The update candidates posted yesterday on the 8.3 testing thread might help here: https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/108803. One of the sm fixes in that batch reads "a failed live leaf coalesce of a QCOW2 image on a slave host caused the SRs to remain in an SR_FAILURE_1200 error state until the VM using the VDI was stopped or tapdisk was manually paused", and to me (could be wrong, though), that looks a lot like your second case. You're also on the versions it replaces (sm 23.5 and blktap 9.5, going to 25.1 and 11.1). I'm less sure about the qcow2_commit: The device is not writable error from the first VM. The blktap notes mention reworking the pause/commit code, but I can't tell if that's the same path. If you have a test pool, trying the candidates there would tell a lot.

I didn't know, so I went and looked at the code. XO prunes that list in a cleanup step: backup runs are kept for 31 days, and other tasks are kept by count, the newest 1000 (https://github.com/vatesfr/xen-orchestra/blob/b59c8f3d20954aa1d72e92c1e8f2db635d74fcba/@xen-orchestra/mixins/Tasks.mjs#L119-L127). You can change both with tasks.gc.keep and tasks.gc.backupKeepDuration in the xo-server config. As far as I can tell the cleanup runs when xo-server starts, not on a timer, so a long-running XO can collect quite a few before the next restart. My guess for the Cloud Backup entries @acebmxer still sees after 30 days is that they're kept by count rather than by age.

@anthoineb, Thanks for the fix! We plan to install blktap-3.55.5-11.1.xcpng8.3 on all three hypervisors tomorrow. We will fully shut down and start the data VMs one at a time, then verify that all running tapdisk processes use the updated binary. As the stalls are intermittent, we will monitor for recurrence and report back with the results.

@MathieuRA We reverted back to 6.8.2 for now. We can wait for patch, otherwise, I have opened a tunnel #38081.

@johnnezero Hi, Sorry, it seems it is only in Rest API for now: You can check it here: <xoa-url>/rest/v0/docs/#/backup-repositories/ReclaimSpaceBackupRepository

I tried it on a lab host (XCP-ng 8.3, xapi 26.1.16): calling VM.pool_migrate on a halted VM gives me your error, VM_BAD_POWER_STATE with running, halted, so the two values are the state XAPI wanted and the one it found. On the XO side, a migration inside the same pool with no SR or network mapping goes straight to VM.pool_migrate without checking the power state first: https://github.com/vatesfr/xen-orchestra/blob/b59c8f3d20954aa1d72e92c1e8f2db635d74fcba/packages/xo-server/src/xapi/index.mjs#L942-L981. So a stopped VM in that batch would give this, which fits what you remember. I haven't tried the batch migrate from the UI itself though, so I don't know if the UI is supposed to filter halted VMs out before that. It's a good concrete example for the feedback post anyway, XO could just say "this VM is halted" instead of passing XAPI's raw code through.

A short label on that step would've saved you the ghost hunt, yes. Since it's a UI change more than a bug, I think https://feedback.vates.tech is where it'd get picked up, ideally with your two screenshots showing "All (8)" against seven VMs.