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

    backup mail report says INTERRUPTED but it's not ?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Backup
    69 Posts 7 Posters 2.5k Views 9 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.
    • M Online
      MajorP93 @olivierlambert
      last edited by MajorP93

      @olivierlambert Right now I am using Node JS version 20 as I saw that XOA uses that version aswell. I thought it might be best to use all dependencies at the versions that XOA uses.

      I was having the issue with backup job "interrupted" status on Node JS 24 aswell as documented in this thread.

      Actually since I downgraded to Node 20 total system RAM usage seems to have decreased by a fair bit which can be seen by comparing the 2 screenshots that I posted in this thread. On first screenshot I was using Node 24 und second screenshot Node 20.
      Despite that the issue re-occurred after a few days of XO running.

      I hope that --max-old-space-size Node parameter as suggested by @pilow solves my issue.
      I will report back.

      Best regards

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

        Okay weird, so having a very different RAM usage with Node 24 should be checked when we'll update XOA Node version.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • P Online
          Pilow @MajorP93
          last edited by

          @MajorP93 this was found in the troubleshooting section of the documentation when i tried to optimise my xoa/xoproxies deployments

          https://docs.xen-orchestra.com/troubleshooting#memory

          P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
          • P Online
            Pilow @Pilow
            last edited by

            not looking better today. still not crashed.
            62622e51-a19c-43e3-b499-a6fde4124eb1-{093F1189-D681-4A45-B0CA-FC72B6E08E9B}.png
            but before the patches at 48h max, i topped the 8Gb and got the OOM killed process.

            P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • P Online
              Pilow @Pilow
              last edited by

              before disruption, I prefer to patch/reboot my XOA
              We got to the limit
              75ebf8f1-42a3-41a4-8179-bcad56b507fb-{BD0DCE60-47E3-4386-AB7E-1BC85D08DE1F}.png
              505f9643-9c4b-4c22-982a-f48ed42798c4-{075C1E52-0AF8-495A-B8E5-372F0C4953E4}.png

              still some memory leak somewhere guys !

              florentF 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • florentF Offline
                florent Vates 🪐 XO Team @Pilow
                last edited by

                @Pilow we are still working on it, but for now we didn't find a solution

                M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                • M Online
                  MajorP93 @florent
                  last edited by MajorP93

                  After implementing the --max-old-space-size Node parameter as recommended by @pilow it took longer time for the VM to hit the issue.
                  Still: backups went into interrupted status.
                  Memory leak seems to be still there.
                  With each subsequent backup run the memory usage rises and rises. After backup run the memory usage does not fully go back to "normal".

                  6ad321a1-2e39-4bca-9285-062e502a17b2-grafik.png

                  After adding the node parameter there was no heap size error on Node anymore since the heap size got increased. The system went into various OOM errors in kernel log (dmesg) despite not all RAM (8GB) being used.

                  This is what htop looks like with 3 backup jobs running:
                  68db77eb-26f2-4dbb-b1db-2273984eabb3-grafik.png

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • A Offline
                    acebmxer
                    last edited by acebmxer

                    While working last night i noticed one of my backups/pools did this. Got the email that it was interupted but when i looked the tasks were still running and moving data it untill it porcess all vms in that backup job.

                    Edit - note my backup job was run via proxy on the specific pool/job.

                    2026-02-19T03_00_00.028Z - backup NG.txt

                    Edit 2 - homelab same last backup was interupted.

                    2026-02-19T05_00_00.011Z - backup NG.txt

                    M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • M Online
                      MajorP93 @acebmxer
                      last edited by MajorP93

                      I wonder if this PR https://github.com/vatesfr/xen-orchestra/pull/9506 aims to solve the issue that was discussed in this thread.
                      To me it looks like it's the case as the issue seems to be related to RAM used by backup jobs not being freed correctly and the PR seems to add some garbage collection to backup jobs.
                      I hope that it will fix the issue and if needed I can test a branch.

                      b-Nollet opened this pull request in vatesfr/xen-orchestra

                      open Backup tasks gc #9506

                      Bastien NolletB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • Bastien NolletB Offline
                        Bastien Nollet Vates 🪐 XO Team @MajorP93
                        last edited by

                        Hi @MajorP93,

                        This PR is only about changing the way we delete old logs (linked to a bigger work of making backups use XO tasks instead of their own task system), it won't fix the issue discussed in this topic.

                        M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • M Online
                          MajorP93 @Bastien Nollet
                          last edited by

                          Hi @Bastien-Nollet,

                          oh okay, thanks for clarifying!

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • First post
                            Last post