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.
    • 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
                  • M Offline
                    maxcuttins @stormi
                    last edited by maxcuttins

                    @stormi said in Citrix Hypervisor 8.0 landed:

                    People are watching me, such honour and responsibility!

                    I told you that people of the forum are "the watchmens".
                    It's even easier if you have subscribed the notification on GitHub on the project.
                    😆

                    donato_marcosD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • donato_marcosD Offline
                      donato_marcos @maxcuttins
                      last edited by

                      @maxcuttins Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

                      @stormi Honor is ours

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                      • antoniolfdacruzA Offline
                        antoniolfdacruz
                        last edited by

                        I also would like to be an alpha/beta tester. HP and Dell blades and assorted Dell servers.

                        Best regards.

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

                          Be sure that as soon we got something to test, you'll be notified 😉

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                          • D Offline
                            dredknight
                            last edited by

                            Hey all,

                            I am building a home lab and will be glad to test the new XCP with Cloudstack on top. Followed the repo!

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

                              Great! We really need CloudStack testing too 🙂

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

                                I finish to test XenServer8 with Ceph.
                                It just works without patches.

                                • Installation of the needed package wouldn't try to update any kind of package of the original installation.
                                • Kernel is already higher enought to include higher RBD client.

                                So you can just mount RBD images manually with few easy steps.
                                I tested quickly the connection and performance were not very good (but I'm working in a nested virtualized environment).

                                I guess all the mess in order to setup the connect are finally over.

                                Now, what it's needed is to create a VHD on top of a RBD images.
                                Probably we can just fork the LVMoverISCSI plugin in order to accomplish last mile of connection.
                                However there are many alternative in order to complete this last step.

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

                                  Can you write few lines on how you did the initial steps? (so we can provide a SMAPIv3 driver for further testing)

                                  M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • R Offline
                                    r1 XCP-ng Team @maxcuttins
                                    last edited by

                                    @maxcuttins You can always have LVM SR on that RBD image device. You need to whitelist /dev/rbd in lvm.conf though.

                                    I'll test once XCP-NG 8 is available.

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

                                      @olivierlambert said in Citrix Hypervisor 8.0 landed:

                                      Can you write few lines on how you did the initial steps? (so we can provide a SMAPIv3 driver for further testing)

                                      Oh yess!
                                      In reality I already wrote yesterday in the wiki everything we know as today about integration with CEPH:
                                      https://github.com/xcp-ng/xcp/wiki/Ceph-on-XCP-ng-7.5-or-later

                                      But this was before my test on XenServer8.
                                      However the steps are exactly the same.
                                      I summarize here the steps (but they are explained better in the wiki):

                                      yum install epel-release -y --enablerepo=extras
                                      yum install centos-release-ceph-nautilus --enablerepo=extras
                                      yum install yum-plugin-priorities --enablerepo=base
                                      yum install ceph-common --enablerepo='base,extras,epel'
                                      

                                      And that's all.
                                      Since today we always needed to install other connector in order to use rbd.
                                      This mean no need for rbd-fuse (rbd over fuse), rbd-nbd (rbd over NBD), ceph-fuse (cephFS over Fuse). We can use the original rbd directly with kernel support.

                                      To map an image:

                                      Before you can connect you need then to just exchange keyrings in order to allow the client to connect.
                                      In order to connect to an image called mytestimage created on the pool XCP-Test-Pool.
                                      Map the block device:

                                      rbd map mytestimage --name client.admin -p XCP-Test-Pool
                                      

                                      Create the filesystem that you prefer on top:

                                      mkfs.ext4 -m0 /dev/rbd/XCP-Test-Pool/mytestimage
                                      

                                      And mount:

                                      mkdir /mnt-test-ceph
                                      mount /dev/rbd/XCP-Test-Pool/mytestimage  /mnt-test-ceph
                                      

                                      I'm gonna to write down all these passages in the WIKI as soon as XCP-8 is out.
                                      Now the hype for the next release is even more. 😍
                                      I'm gonna to stalking @stormi all days 😈

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

                                        I throw down one of my xcp-host to setup a not-nested-virtualized xen-8 in order to test RBD speed. Performance are about 4x slower than they should be but at least it run almost like a standard local disk.

                                        dd if=/dev/zero of=./test.img bs=1G count=1 oflag=dsync
                                        1+0 records in
                                        1+0 records out
                                        1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 1.86156 s, 577 MB/s
                                        
                                        C 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • P Offline
                                          Prilly
                                          last edited by

                                          Have anybody tried xcp 8.0 with the intel x56xx series cpu?

                                          why is support for this cpus dropped, are there any technical behind it or just that they are old and considerd Legacy?

                                          i would like to know if this cpus have been tried with this veriosn of xcp.

                                          borzelB akurzawaA 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 2
                                          • C Offline
                                            cg @maxcuttins
                                            last edited by

                                            @maxcuttins said in Citrix Hypervisor 8.0 landed:

                                            I throw down one of my xcp-host to setup a not-nested-virtualized xen-8 in order to test RBD speed. Performance are about 4x slower than they should be but at least it run almost like a standard local disk.

                                            dd if=/dev/zero of=./test.img bs=1G count=1 oflag=dsync
                                            1+0 records in
                                            1+0 records out
                                            1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 1.86156 s, 577 MB/s
                                            

                                            1G is usually a really bad test, as pretty small things can influence the result massively.
                                            You should run tests with 10 or better 100 - if you can.
                                            That also diminishes influence of any caches (on source and target!).

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