XCP-ng
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    SMB SR Creation Fails

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Xen Orchestra
    14 Posts 6 Posters 1.9k Views 3 Watching
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • olivierlambertO Offline
      olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
      last edited by

      Ping @MathieuRA about this

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • gskgerG Offline
        gskger Top contributor
        last edited by gskger

        I have the same result (fail) on a synology share. Accessing the share from W10 works with the path, user and password.

        sr.createSmb
        {
          "host": "aa4b3c41-a5dc-48ea-94f9-1a6b395d22f7",
          "nameLabel": "myplaylab-smb",
          "nameDescription": "myplaylab-smb",
          "server": "\\\\10.10.20.150\\myplaylab-smb",
          "user": "xcpsmb",
          "password": "* obfuscated *"
        }
        {
          "code": "SR_BACKEND_FAILURE_111",
          "params": [
            "",
            "SMB mount error [opterr=mount failed with return code 32]",
            ""
          ],
          "call": {
            "method": "SR.create",
            "params": [
              "OpaqueRef:f8b6d893-338d-40e4-9e4a-c978a3ee9f24",
              {
                "server": "\\\\e20150\\myplaylab-smb",
                "user": "xcpsmb",
                "password": "* obfuscated *"
              },
              0,
              "myplaylab-smb",
              "myplaylab-smb",
              "smb",
              "user",
              true,
              {}
            ]
          },
          "message": "SR_BACKEND_FAILURE_111(, SMB mount error [opterr=mount failed with return code 32], )",
          "name": "XapiError",
          "stack": "XapiError: SR_BACKEND_FAILURE_111(, SMB mount error [opterr=mount failed with return code 32], )
            at Function.wrap (file:///opt/xen-orchestra/packages/xen-api/_XapiError.mjs:16:12)
            at file:///opt/xen-orchestra/packages/xen-api/transports/json-rpc.mjs:35:21
            at runNextTicks (node:internal/process/task_queues:60:5)
            at processImmediate (node:internal/timers:447:9)
            at process.callbackTrampoline (node:internal/async_hooks:128:17)"
        }
        

        Message from /var/log/SMlog

        Feb  6 21:29:06 e20110 SM: [31263] NOTE: No CIFS credentials found in dconf
        Feb  6 21:29:06 e20110 SM: [31263] ['mount.cifs', '\\\\10.10.20.150\\myplaylab-smb', '/var/run/sr-mount/SMB/10.10.20.150/myplaylab-smb/55b4a94a-f6c9-8003-1f26-a2206201e9b6', '-o', 'cache=loose,vers=3.0,actimeo=0,guest']
        Feb  6 21:29:06 e20110 SM: [31263] FAILED in util.pread: (rc 32) stdout: '', stderr: 'mount error(13): Permission denied
        Feb  6 21:29:06 e20110 SM: [31263] Refer to the mount.cifs(8) manual page (e.g. man mount.cifs)
        Feb  6 21:29:06 e20110 SM: [31263] '
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263] ['mount.cifs', '\\\\10.10.20.150\\myplaylab-smb', '/var/run/sr-mount/SMB/10.10.20.150/myplaylab-smb/55b4a94a-f6c9-8003-1f26-a2206201e9b6', '-o', 'cache=loose,vers=3.0,actimeo=0,guest']
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263] FAILED in util.pread: (rc 32) stdout: '', stderr: 'mount error(13): Permission denied
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263] Refer to the mount.cifs(8) manual page (e.g. man mount.cifs)
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263] '
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263] Raising exception [111, SMB mount error [opterr=mount failed with return code 32]]
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263] lock: released /var/lock/sm/55b4a94a-f6c9-8003-1f26-a2206201e9b6/sr
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263] ***** generic exception: sr_create: EXCEPTION <class 'SR.SROSError'>, SMB mount error [opterr=mount failed with return code 32]
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263]   File "/opt/xensource/sm/SRCommand.py", line 110, in run
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263]     return self._run_locked(sr)
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263]   File "/opt/xensource/sm/SRCommand.py", line 159, in _run_locked
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263]     rv = self._run(sr, target)
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263]   File "/opt/xensource/sm/SRCommand.py", line 323, in _run
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263]     return sr.create(self.params['sr_uuid'], long(self.params['args'][0]))
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263]   File "/opt/xensource/sm/SMBSR", line 247, in create
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263]     raise xs_errors.XenError('SMBMount', opterr=exc.errstr)
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263]
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263] ***** SMB VHD: EXCEPTION <class 'SR.SROSError'>, SMB mount error [opterr=mount failed with return code 32]
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263]   File "/opt/xensource/sm/SRCommand.py", line 378, in run
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263]     ret = cmd.run(sr)
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263]   File "/opt/xensource/sm/SRCommand.py", line 110, in run
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263]     return self._run_locked(sr)
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263]   File "/opt/xensource/sm/SRCommand.py", line 159, in _run_locked
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263]     rv = self._run(sr, target)
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263]   File "/opt/xensource/sm/SRCommand.py", line 323, in _run
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263]     return sr.create(self.params['sr_uuid'], long(self.params['args'][0]))
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263]   File "/opt/xensource/sm/SMBSR", line 247, in create
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263]     raise xs_errors.XenError('SMBMount', opterr=exc.errstr)
        Feb  6 21:29:07 e20110 SM: [31263]
        

        Mounting on the command line works with

        mount -t cifs --verbose '//10.10.20.150/myplaylab-smb' /mnt/smb -o 'username=xcpsmb,password=* obfuscated *'
        

        Manually creating files and directories works on the mounted share (on the host, XO from source commit 2498a and the W10 client).

        Edit: add output from /var/log/SMlog, comment on creating files and directories and XO from source commit

        D 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • Tristis OrisT Offline
          Tristis Oris Top contributor
          last edited by

          i have same ticket opened. https://github.com/vatesfr/xen-orchestra/issues/7356

          TristisOris created this issue in vatesfr/xen-orchestra

          closed SMB VDI share mount error - extra backslash on creation #7356

          gskgerG 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
          • gskgerG Offline
            gskger Top contributor @Tristis Oris
            last edited by

            @Tristis-Oris Great, thank you 🙏

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • D Offline
              DustinB @gskger
              last edited by

              I had a similar experience not to long ago, though NFS on Synology for an existing directory that was previously connected to a recently rebuilt host.

              We didn't get to far along on that, to fix the issue I made a new share on the synology, moved everything over and then connected the new share to XO without much fanfair.

              gskgerG 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • gskgerG Offline
                gskger Top contributor @DustinB
                last edited by gskger

                @DustinB Yep, I am using NFS on Synology as well for ISO repository, storage repository (SR) and backup repository (BR). Also using a TrueNAS CORE host for NFS shares in my playlab. Both work great.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • G Offline
                  gb.123
                  last edited by gb.123

                  @gskger @Tristis-Oris @MathieuRA @olivierlambert
                  Can anyone tell me the difference between creating an SMB SR at Pool level vs at Host level ?

                  Somehow XO does not allow storage to be created at 'Pool' level but through Xen Center, I am able to create an SMB SR at 'Pool' Level.

                  Will creating SR at pool level interfere with XO later (since this is not allowed by XO)?
                  Or is it simply a missing GUI in XO ?

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • olivierlambertO Offline
                    olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
                    last edited by

                    It doesn't matter, it's the exact same thing. Any NFS/SMB/iSCSI SR will be shared by all the pool members anyway.

                    G 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • G Offline
                      gb.123 @olivierlambert
                      last edited by gb.123

                      @olivierlambert

                      Hmm.. In that case, should we change the GUI in XO to create it at Pool level only for cleaner interface (hide host lists) ?

                      Also, it will be a little more clearer that it would be shared.

                      (I mean this can be done in XO-6, since this is not a critical feature (though a good to have feature))

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • olivierlambertO Offline
                        olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
                        last edited by

                        That's correct, we'll try to think it better for XO 6, even if there's no universal "better", it depends on many things (like maybe starting to select shared or not, but this might introduce complexity: we'll discuss that with @clemencebx )

                        G 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • G Offline
                          gb.123 @olivierlambert
                          last edited by

                          @olivierlambert said in SMB SR Creation Fails:

                          (like maybe starting to select shared or not, but this might introduce complexity: we'll discuss that with @clemencebx )

                          Rather than selecting shared or not, we can simply have level of creation... eg. if created at pool level, it is shared, if at node level, then only connected to node.

                          That should help reduce complexity in UI.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • olivierlambertO Offline
                            olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
                            last edited by

                            There's many choices, so we'll see when discussing with @clemencebx 🙂

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • MathieuRAM Offline
                              MathieuRA Vates 🪐 XO Team @gb.123
                              last edited by

                              Hi!

                              The issue should be resolved on the branch fix-smb-storage

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                              • First post
                                Last post