@andriy.sultanov Absolutely. I wasn't sure if the old way was incompatible with the new way or not. So the old 8.2 method will still work without conflict in 8.3?? If so, I'll have an answer for you shortly.

Hello! I realize now that the testing procedure was flawed - I shouldn't have "forced started" the replicated VM. I should have started a copy. But I don't think it would have changed the end result anyway. Over the weekend I reverted my replications to groups, each group sending to a specific repository. Now they replicate but I'm getting duplicates. Can it be that "The long term retention of backups" is also affecting the replication retention ? [image: 1784541678358-cbb09dd6-e8d0-4d4a-a476-e824a184a7d5-image.jpeg] I want backup to have long term retention and replication to only keep the latest replication. Cheers, Pedro

There is a public alliance, announced back in April: Vates joined Everpure's Technology Alliance Program, and Everpure came in as an associate member of the Vates Alliance Network (https://vates.tech/blog/vates-joins-the-everpure-technology-alliance-program/). What that post actually commits to is validated reference architectures and compatibility documentation, with backup, disaster recovery and automation workflows named as planned expansion, so the area you're asking about is at least in scope. Whether any of that becomes an equivalent of the VMware pure-plugin, with per-VM restore from SafeMode snapshots, I genuinely don't know, and I'd rather not guess while you're deciding whether to spend weeks on it. Before you go far it might be worth a mention to @Team-Storage, since they'd know whether the array-side work is heading that way. Selfishly I'd rather you asked first than quietly built something that ends up overlapping. I'm not close enough to the storage roadmap to give you a straight yes or no.

On the bundle, the docs warn it can carry sensitive details about your setup, so better not to attach it publicly: https://docs.xcp-ng.org/troubleshooting/log-files#produce-a-status-report. As far as I can tell there is no self-serve upload spot, it is usually someone from Vates dropping you a private Nextcloud link when you ask, so flagging here that you have the bundle ready is probably the quickest route. Since this was a kernel panic, is there anything in /var/crash on the host that went down, and which host was it this time? The earlier ones were xen04 and xen03.

Hello @tmk, The fix is on its way: https://github.com/vatesfr/xen-orchestra/pull/10129 It should be included in XO 6.7, which will be released at the end of month.

Ping @julienXOVates

Perfect, thanks for your feedback!

@pierrebrunet said: Hi, just to be sure, are you saying it is working ok apart one task 8 days ago? Yes, after I adjusted the time it's working

@pierrebrunet Hello! I've checked B2 logs and found some errors like you had foreseen. I had a look and this kind of 500 INTERNAL ERROR several times on other jobs that seem ok. How many retries does XO attempt to send the part when this happens? I'll do another run that includes only a few large VMs. BTW, is there a way to interrupt the job withou restarting XO ? REST.PUT.PART Weekly/xo-vm-backups/60b4d2a7-3f91-f0f9-b0a0-f834df3ff9ee/20260705T070618Z.xva "PUT /zzzzzkly/xo-vm-backups/60b4d2a7-3f91-f0f9-b0a0-f834df3ff9ee/20260705T070618Z.xva?partNumber=3954&uploadId=4_ze092693d1b65962e9fe6051b_f25969add7e42e384_d20260713_m140016_c003_v0312040_t0013_u01783951216751&x-id=UploadPart HTTP/1.1" 500 INTERNAL_ERROR 145 - 3762 3762 "-" "aws-sdk-js/3.1065.0 ua/2.1 os/linux#5.15.0-185-generic lang/js md/nodejs#24.18.0 api/s3#3.1065.0 m/N,a,c,E,e xen-orchestra-fs-4.9.2" - - - TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 AuthHeader s3.eu-central-003.backblazeb2.com TLSv1.3 - -

@simonp , thank you very much and all of your team ! ! ! Keep up the outstanding work. Regards, Marc

Hi @acebmxer, thanks for reporting, we identified this bug internally already, we're going to fix it once root cause is found.

Hi Everyone, If I may advertise what I did you have a dedicated thread about my project, this is an easy to setup XCP-ng and XO from the source solution. Sorry sharing the link to the topic as is couldn't find better way to do that : XCP-ng HL — an ISO for home labs, deploy any XOA image from XO Lite directly Essentially you deploy XCP-ng ISO and then in XO Lite deploy XOA section you can deploy your prebuilt or XOA VM directly. Hope that helps Home labers to get in to XCP-ng easily. Same here this is still work in progress, also I'm personally already using this version in my lab. Any feedback is welcome ! With regards.

@acebmxer I can confirm that, we'll fix it, thanks

Just FYI, we had some issues with some Debian VMs for instance, with old kernel where the VM would suddenly take 100% CPU and would we completely frozen and unresponsive. It was in fact Debian enabling the suspend, the guest would suspend and trigger a bug in xen PV driver in the guest kernel which would never be able to wake up anymore. Newer kernel don't have this issue and are able to wake up. I'm quoting Debian here but it might very well happen on other distro

Ping @Team-Storage

Hi @dvdwx, RBAC is available only at the REST API level, not through the XO6 UI. UI compatibility with RBAC is currently under development. For the topology, this is something that has been here for a long time, so I may be wrong since I don't have the full history. However, if I look at the code, creating the topology selector requires knowing how many CPUs are available in the pool. Since a self-service user doesn't have visibility into the pool, they can't access this kind of information.