XCP-ng - XOA vs. XOCE
-
@L1512191 said in XCP-ng - XOA vs. XOCE:
Forked discussion from https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/96400
I read the readme of the XOCE installation script. Nice job @DustinB!
Can someone tell me about the limitations of XOCE, compared to XOA? I assume there are some, as XOCE "is not officially supported by the Vates team", but please correct me if I'm wrong.
XOCE is offered free of charge, support is offered from that community (also free of charge). It is not officially supported by Vates, as Vates is the business that has created XO and XCP-ng, they sell support, but you could also use XOA free which has limitations on its functionality.
XOCE is built from the source documentation and is unrestricted to what you can do, but support is from good will, and best effort rather than paid support of the Vates organization.
XOCE gives you a completely functional system that works to manage, backup and restore your VM's that is available from the source documentation. Features that are only available from XOA Hub, aren't available. This is because the Hub is tied to a license that you would get with your subscription from Vates.
Otherwise there aren't any "limitations" it's that XOCE literally has no way to get access to that particular feature.
-
So if I understand you right, then XOA and XOCE are identical if you disregard the following:
- Pro Support
- XOA Hub
Correct?
-
@L1512191 Not entirely correct. XOA (the pre-build appliance from Vates) includes some additional functionality. For example --
- Built in updater with the ability to select from several release channels
- Ability to deploy / manage proxies
- Ability to deploy / manage XOSTOR instances
- Support related features (tunnel, 16 point check, ability to restart xo-server from the UI)
- Cloud based XO config backup
-
@L1512191 Dan answered, but there are features of XOA that are only available from having a support agreement with Vates. If you don't need those features or can use other approaches for the things that you might need, then XOCE might be for you.
-
There's that list I was curious about! Thanks for elaborating.
This brings out the question; Is there any way to use XOA, without a support contract? For example a one-time-cost for only XOA, instead of the YRC/MRC you pay for support. Or just deploy for free without support.
At this point I'm just gathering facts that are not easily available, so that I and others can understand the available choices/paths better.
-
You can deploy and use XOA Free, which is a scaled down version without support or access to some features like backups. You also can get a free trial of XOA Premium, which allows you to access to all of the features for 30 days without any commitment.
-
@Danp ,
Is it possible to add the comparison of the XOCE together wit XO in this page?.
https://vates.tech/pricing-and-support/#features-matrix -
@AlbertK That would be a business decision above my pay grade. IMO that doesn't make sense because that page is showing the VMS bundles, which includes support for both XO and XCP-ng.
You can find some of the information discussed above in the XO docs. For example --
https://docs.xen-orchestra.com/xoa
https://docs.xen-orchestra.com/installation#from-the-sources
-
@Danp Thanks for the reply and I understand. Since this is project is Open Source with Commercial offerings. I think it is good to show what are the differences in one place. With caveat that the OSS project is actually only source code and compiled executable is not provided.
Hope the big Kahuna can consider this :).
-
Hi,
It's not relevant for our most critical users (ie paid customers), because they don't want to have a complex matrix. They all come from VMware and they need something simple to explain.
If you are a home labber, you can just check xcp-ng.org website and https://docs.xen-orchestra.com/installation, that's enough
-
@AlbertK said in XCP-ng - XOA vs. XOCE:
@Danp ,
Is it possible to add the comparison of the XOCE together wit XO in this page?.
https://vates.tech/pricing-and-support/#features-matrixXOCE is a term that I came up with when I originally started writing the deployment script that exists today.
It's stuck around. Vates uses the terms XOA and "XO from Sources" as their unique products. XOCE would be "you used a github script to deploy" (my github) XO.
XO from Sources is a completely manual process where you're following the documentation to deploy XO. This approach gets you the same thing that XOCE does, but takes longer to complete since you're finishing each step over SSH rather than running a single bash command on a Ubuntu/Debian VM.
