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

    Citrix Hypervisor 8.0 landed

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved News
    65 Posts 20 Posters 34.8k Views 7 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.
    • jcpt928J Offline
      jcpt928 @cg
      last edited by

      @cg I have a feeling that it may not actually even boot without messing with grub configuration if my experience serves me right.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
      • C Offline
        cg
        last edited by

        @jcpt928 regarding the old or the actual Xeons? 😉
        I may have the chance to test an HPE DL20 with E-21xx aka Coffee Lake in some weeks, when I have a plan on what to do with/for a customer (probably XCP-ng, test if USB-passthrough works with that dongles...).

        jcpt928J 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • jcpt928J Offline
          jcpt928 @cg
          last edited by

          @cg Well, I know I have had to make grub modifications even up to E3 v2 CPUs, including as old as L, E, and X series 56xx CPUs using the latest version of XCP-ng. I have also had to do so on first through 3rd generation Core CPUs on a couple occasions. I imagine 8.0 will be even more limited - VMware takes the same, more aggressive, approach.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • C Offline
            cheese
            last edited by

            What can I help to make XCP-ng 8.0 available sooner?

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

              @stormi got a nice TODO list right now, but I'm sure a lot of testing will be involved, so we'll keep you posted as soon we got a testable ISO, even if it's an alpha 😛

              Adding mirrors could help to spread the load for netinstall or yum update when it's out too.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
              • stormiS Offline
                stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team @cheese
                last edited by

                @cheese you can also have a look at our open issues at https://github.com/xcp-ng/xcp/issues and see if there's anything where you can help.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • xiscoX Offline
                  xisco
                  last edited by

                  I hope XCP-ng will support legacy CPUs as I have E5-24XX series servers 😞
                  I guess they will work fine but as they are not supported officially ...

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

                    Regarding the news of this version:

                    • Kernel version: Linux 4.19 ✔
                    • Xen hypervisor version: 4.11 ✔
                    • Control domain operating system version: CentOS 7.5 ✔
                    • Guest UEFI boot ❓ (only for Windows?)
                    • Virtual disk images larger than 2 TiB on GFS2 SR ❓ (already there before, SMAPIv3/qcow2, I don't see the point?)
                    • Disk and memory snapshots for vGPU-enabled VM ❓ (hard to test here)

                    Note that it could have been Xen 4.12 or CentOS 7.6, but still, it's far more recent than the content of 7.6! 🙂

                    We'll see if we can bundle a Xen 4.12 in experimental repo in the future, but we know that the ABI breaks so we'll need a more recent XAPI too, which can be difficult and require a loads of tests anyway.

                    About UEFI: it's not completely Open Source, but the license inside said we can redistribute it. However, we'd like to have something really open, ie with the sources. So we'll see.

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

                      @xisco I suppose it's only meant in terms of Citrix support and not the fact "it doesn't work". Note that if it works, we (via XCP-ng Pro support) will support it and do our best to assist if you have a problem.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                      • R Offline
                        r1 XCP-ng Team
                        last edited by

                        @olivierlambert said in Citrix Hypervisor 8.0 landed:

                        Virtual disk images larger than 2 TiB on GFS2 SR (already there before, SMAPIv3/qcow2, I don't see the point?)

                        Is there a real implementation of SMAPIv3 that people can use today (via XAPI)? Or it is going to be released in 8.0?

                        VHD (NFS, EXT, LVM, LVMoISCSI, LVMoHBA) has 2TiB restrictions. I'm sure community will benefit from larger than 2TiB virtual disks on these SR types.

                        I don't think GFS2 will be full open source and available to all.

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

                          GFS2 is using SMAPIv3 since 7.5. I wonder how they can sell it due to the very very poor performances (it was catastrophic in 7.5). But as you said, the Citrix implementation isn't Open Source.

                          We made some tests and we managed to make ext4 working on SMAPIv3. However, perfs were so low that we waited for a new release (also because some part of SMAPIv3 are Open Source BUT we don't have access to the dev branch).

                          We started to make bench on latest Citrix release, if we got decent perfs, then expect to have first drivers soon 🙂 However, this will be considered still experimental because you have a lot restriction: migration to legacy SR, no delta etc.

                          E 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                          • E Offline
                            ebrainte @olivierlambert
                            last edited by

                            @olivierlambert So you are saying that in the future releases we may have ext4 support over iSCSI? (so real VHD files instead LVM over iSCSI)?

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

                              No, I never said that: don't mix SMAPIv3 and shared block storage. SMAPIv3 is "just" a brand new storage stack allowing far more flexibility due to its architecture 🙂

                              Sharing block on multiple host is a complete another story. You can use LVM (but you'll end in a thick pro storage), or a shared filesystem, like GFS2/OCFS, + a lock manager (corosync is used by Citrix)

                              Having ext4 on top of iSCSI is easy… as long as you have one host. Because when it's more, ext4 isn't a "cluster aware" filesystem.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • M Offline
                                maxcuttins
                                last edited by

                                UEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE Kernel 4.19????
                                Wow! This means that this kernel already support natively all the client feature set of Ceph.
                                This means no feature downgrade server side.

                                This means a HUGE step forward.
                                I'm about to take over again the project this month.
                                Very good news in the air!

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

                                  This will probably helps to connect to Ceph, however perfs level would be unknown 🙂

                                  K 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • M Offline
                                    maxcuttins
                                    last edited by

                                    I've see the @stormi to-do list.
                                    Seems very goal oriented.

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • C Offline
                                      cg
                                      last edited by

                                      Link? 😆

                                      olivierlambertO 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • K Offline
                                        Kalloritis @olivierlambert
                                        last edited by

                                        @olivierlambert I would be willing to be a testing help for this. I have a few 6TB WD Golds I could throw each onto four older Fat Twin^2 nodes and do maybe passthrough for the OSD's (slightly esoteric and small but could give baselines if E5645's are still supported).

                                        Currently they're just "collecting dust" inside of a chassis and use to be part of a 6x6TB RAIDZ2 ZFS pool that was retired for a 10x10TB RAIDZ2 pool (general storage + endpoint backups).

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

                                          @cg https://github.com/xcp-ng/xcp/issues/180

                                          stormi created this issue in xcp-ng/xcp

                                          closed XCP-ng 8.0 (meta-issue) #180

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                                          • stormiS Offline
                                            stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
                                            last edited by

                                            People are watching me, such honour and responsibility!

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