@Pilow Thanks for the heads-up, you should be able to add back concurrency as it was before and get similar performance to before the refactoring.

Thank you for your feedback @kratos !

@archw Could the results you are observing be due to the fact that some of the files weren't modified in the specific delta backup that you selected as your restore point? For example: In another subdirectory there are supposed to be 7 files but in the selection window there are only two. When were these 5 "missing" files last modified?

@Aleksander There are plenty of examples on this forum. We have used Nvidia T4, it works very well.

perhaps "in the context of a proceeding RPU, do not start halted VMs" ? or "boot only halted VMs that have HA enabled" ? but I can imagine corner cases where this is not wanted. some chicken & egg problem.

@Mark-C this is not forgotten, but file level restore has been under priorised, so it didn't get much work it is now quite high on our backlog , so expect good news in the next months

@tsukraw No worries! Just glad that we can all help each other out!

@flakpyro that's a good news ( but at least another user saw this) we are currently testing the branch ensuring that at least the fix don't create other issues

Hi @olivierlambert and @pilow Thank you for your answers, it helps a lot, Regards, Olivier

@TechGrips Sorry, there is no quick test to be sure the VM is not corrupted. The usual way would be to make a healthcheck. We cannot be sure everything is ok as it concerns multiple tar linked to each other. If it keeps warning you on the same backups, it may be due to a faulty parent. You would need for this to create a new chain of snapshot

new mail received from Laurent Nguyen today Bonjour, Face à la hausse des tarifs VMware, nous vous invitons à remplir un questionnaire pour mieux comprendre vos attentes et améliorer nos services. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/288HCLL Merci d’avance pour votre temps. Et si n’est pas encore fait, n’oubliez pas de vous inscrire au Veeam Technical Cloud Club qui aura lieu le Jeudi 16 Avril 2026 : https://go.veeam.com/webinar-technical-cloud-club-france Go give some love to XCP-NG + VEEAM collaboration in the survey !

@omatsei said: @omatsei I figured out the problem. There appears to be a bug in XO that requires you to check "Check Certificate" and/or "Start TLS", save the configuration, then uncheck them, then save again. Then it should work. The bug is that they're unchecked by default, but apparently they're enabled in the background. Thanks for that, I was stump on this one trying to reconfigure a new instance. This is defintely the case even with the latest auth-ldap (v0.10.11) plugin.

main.xxx (azazel.xxx) Snapshot Start: 2026-04-10 00:03 End: 2026-04-10 00:03 Local storage (137.41 GiB free - thin) - legion.xxx transfer Start: 2026-04-10 00:03 End: 2026-04-10 00:09 Duration: 6 minutes Size: 17.08 GiB Speed: 47.42 MiB/s Start: 2026-04-10 00:03 End: 2026-04-10 00:09 Duration: 6 minutes Start: 2026-04-10 00:03 End: 2026-04-10 00:09 Duration: 6 minutes Type: full

@Andrew Yeah but XOA is still using it hence my interest in aligning my XO-CE instance with XOA as close as possible.

@Bastien-Nollet I'm running c1e5f btw

@jerry1333 said: There is nothing else on that host and this is only host in pool but it's using 30% of cpu all the time? it's not using 30% of CPU, you see a graph of cumulated (switch is on) core consumption of your 32 cores. never switch this on. it adds up like that : 32x1%=32%, wrongfully letting you think you are at 30%ish CPU usage.

If you're looking for a quick way to verify those files without running a full restoration test every single time, you can usually run a checksum comparison (MD5 or SHA256) against the original data. For a more 'point and click' approach to double-check specific files or verify hashes quickly, I've used https://thetoolapp.com/utilities/file-integrity-checker/ before. It’s pretty handy for a quick integrity check if you aren't in the mood to mess around with the command line for every single backup set.

Hello @tsukraw , normally your client should be able to bind the new license on their XOA. BTW, you talk about binding the license to a pool but an XOA license is bound to an XOA. I suggest your customer open a support ticket so we can help them with that issue.