backup mail report says INTERRUPTED but it's not ?

[Pilow]

@john.c said in backup mail report says INTERRUPTED but it's not ?:

Are you using NodeJS 22 or 24 for your instance of XO?

here is the node version on our problematic XOA

this XOA do NOT manage backup jobs, totally offloaded to XO PROXIES

XOA PROXies :

[06:18 04] xoa@XOA-PROXY01:~$ node -v
v20.18.3

and XO CE :

root@fallback-XOA:~# node -v
v24.13.0

[MajorP93]

This is the RAM usage of my XO CE instance (Debian 13, Node 24, XO commit fa110ed9c92acf03447f5ee3f309ef6861a4a0d4 / "feat: release 6.1.0")

Metrics are exported via XO openmetrics plugin.

At the spots in the graph where my XO CE instance used around 2GB of RAM it was freshly restarted.
Between 31.01. and 03.02. you can see the RAM usage climbing and climbing until my backup jobs went into "interrupted" status on 03.02. due to Node JS heap issue as described in my error report in post https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/102160.

[MajorP93]

I deployed XOA and used it to create a list of all XO dependencies and their respective versions as this seems to be the baseline that Vates tests against.

I then went ahead and re-deployed my XO CE VM using the exact same package versions that XOA uses.

This resulted in me using Debian 12, kernel 6.1, Node 20, etc.

I hope that this gives my backup jobs more stability.

It would be convenient if we would be able to get this information (validated, stable dependencies) from documentation instead of having to deploy XOA.

Best regards

[olivierlambert]

That's precisely the value of XOA and why we are selling it. If you want best tested/stability, XOA is the way to go

[MajorP93]

@olivierlambert Sure, I absolutely get that XO CE comes with absolutely no warranty and XOA is the supported, enterprise grade product.
If the budget was there and if I was to decide on that I would be happy to use it.

It might still be a good idea to update your documentation at https://docs.xen-orchestra.com/installation#packages-and-prerequisites to at least align it with the Node JS version that you actually use and test against internally.
(The linked part of documentation advises to use Node 24 while you are shipping Node 20 in XOA.)

During testing it looked like running XO on Node 20 behaves quite differently compared to running it on Node 24 when it comes to RAM management. It looks like this got also confirmed by other users in this thread.

XO CE users actually using and testing the versions that you ship might be of value for finding bugs.
I think the documentation should generally advise to use the packages that you target during development in order to make the experience as good as possible for everyone.

Just my two cents.

[olivierlambert]

Yes, we'll update the doc

[Pilow]

so, I stopped rebooting my XOA everyday

just patched 6.1.1, it restarted xo-server

guess I'll have to let it disabled for 48h to see if with new patch, RAM is still ramping up.
will report back.

[Pilow]

ramp up and stabilization at 2.9Gb RAM

need some 48H more data to confirm the behavior have changed

XOPROXIES have also been upgraded to latests :

they didnt present any problem of RAM overusage even before
and my 4 proxies are offloading the entire backup jobs from main XOA thats serves only for management

[florent]

@Pilow that is a good news

[Pilow]

@florent
checked this morning, it took another step to 3.63Gb used RAM.

the slope is really different than before, stay tuned