Citrix Hypervisor 8.0 landed

olivierlambert

@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

stormi

People are watching me, such honour and responsibility!

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_marcos

@maxcuttins Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

@stormi Honor is ours

antoniolfdacruz

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

Best regards.

olivierlambert

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

dredknight

Hey all,

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

olivierlambert

Great! We really need CloudStack testing too

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.

olivierlambert

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

r1

@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.

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

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

Prilly

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.

cg

@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!).

borzel

@Prilly XCP-ng 8.0 (the Host) is not released (even not an alpha or beta), I only released XCP-ng Center 8.0 (the Windows Client)

akurzawa

@Prilly the same thing I'm wondering what could be wrong with that cpus beside of high power consumption which is obvious becouse those cpus are about 7 yrs old.

VmWare is working with that cpu but 6.7 installer says that the support for that cpu will be dropped. And that would be not good for me becouse I would need to replace all of my servers which is not the case.

akurzawa

@xisco said in Citrix Hypervisor 8.0 landed:

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 ...

E5 arent legacy. Xeons x5xx are.

Arraylist

According to the XS HCL Citrix Hypervisor 8.0 is supporting Dell R420 servers but not Dell R430 (same model, but newer, you can still buy the R430). The newer R440 is also supported. This seems very odd to me. Has anyone any idea why this is the case?

stormi

While you're waiting for XCP-ng 8.0 beta, what about testing the latest security update to help us release it fast?

https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/11832

Thanks!