<![CDATA[XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available!]]>Good morning, afternoon, evening or night to everybody.

The beta release of XCP-ng 8.0 is available right now 🚀 .

What's new

  • Based on Citrix Hypervisor 8.0 (see https://xen-orchestra.com/blog/xenserver-7-6/).
  • New kernel (4.19), updated CentOS packages (7.2 => 7.5)
  • Xen 4.11
  • New hardware supported thanks to the new kernel. Some older hardware is not supported anymore. It's still expected work in most cases but security cannot be guaranteed for those especially against side-channel attacks on legacy Intel CPUs. See Citrix's Hardware Compatibility List. Note: in 7.6 we've started providing alternate drivers for some hardware. That's something we intend to keep doing, so that we can extend the compatibility list whenever possible. See https://github.com/xcp-ng/xcp/wiki/Kernel-modules-policy.
  • ). Note: in 7.6 we've started providing alternate drivers
  • Experimental UEFI support for guests (not tested yet: have fun and report!)
  • An updated welcome HTML page with the ability to install Xen Orchestra Appliance directly from there (see below). Tell us how it works for you and what you think of it!
  • A new implementation of the infamous emu-manager, rewritten in C. Test live migrations extensively!
  • Mirrors: you can offer mirrors and yum now pulls from them: https://github.com/xcp-ng/xcp/wiki/Mirrors
  • Already includes the latest patches for MDS attacks.
  • The net-install installer now checks the signature of the downloaded RPMs against our GPG key, which is becoming more important now that we're delegating downloads to mirrors.
  • Status of our experimental packages:
    • ext4 and xfs support for local SR are still considered experimental, although no one reported any issue about it. You still need to install an additional package for it to work: yum install sm-additional-drivers.
    • ZFS packages are now available in the main repositories, can be installed with a simple yum install zfs, and have been updated to version 0.8.1 (as of 2019-06-18) which removes the limitations we had with the previous version in XCP-ng 7.6.
    • No more modified qemu-dp for Ceph support, due to stalled issue in 7.6 (patches need to be updated). However the newer kernel brings better support for Ceph and there's some documentation in the wiki: https://github.com/xcp-ng/xcp/wiki/Ceph-on-XCP-ng-7.5-or-later.
    • Alternate kernel: none available yet for 8.0, but it's likely that we'll provide one later.
  • New repository structure. updates_testing, extras and extras_testing disappear and there's now simply: base, updatesandtesting`. Extra packages are now in the same repos as the main packages, for simpler installation and upgrades.
  • It's our first release with close to 100% of the packages rebuilt in our build infrastructure, which is Koji: https://koji.xcp-ng.org. Getting to this stage was a long path, so even if it changes nothing for users it's a big step for us. For the curious ones, more about the build process at https://github.com/xcp-ng/xcp/wiki/Development-process-tour.

Documentation

At this stage you should be aware that our main documentation is in our wiki and you should also know that you can all take part in completing it. Since the previous release, it has improved a lot but there's still a lot to improve.

How to upgrade

As usual, there should be two different upgrade methods: classical upgrade via installation ISO or upgrade using yum.

However, the yum-style update is not ready yet. Since this is a major release, Citrix does not support updating using an update ISO, and the consequence for us is that the RPMs have not been carefully crafted for clean update. So it's all on us, and we plan to have this ready for the RC (release candidate).

Before upgrading, remember that it is a pre-release, so the risks are higher than with a final release. But if you can take the risk, please do and tell us how it went and what method you used! However, we've been testing it internally with success and xcp-ng.org already runs on XCP-ng 8.0 (which includes this forum, the main repository and the mirror redirector) !

Although not updated yet, the Upgrade Howto remains mostly valid (except the part about yum-style upgrade, as I said above).

It's a good habit to check your downloaded ISO against the SHA256 sum and for better security also check the signature of those sums. Although our mirror redirector does try to detect file changes on mirrors, it's shoud always be envisioned that a mirror (or in the worst case our source mirror) gets hacked and managed to provide both fake ISOs and SHA256 sums. But they can't fake the signature.

Stay up to date

Run yum update regularly. We'll fix bugs that are detected regularly until the release candidate. Subscribe to this thread (and make sure to activate mail notifications in the forum parameters if you need them): we'll announce every update to the beta here.

What to test

Everything! 🙂

Report or ask anything as replies to this thread.

A community effort to list things to be tested has been started at https://github.com/xcp-ng/xcp/wiki/Test-XCP

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/topic/1370/xcp-ng-8-0-0-beta-now-availableRSS for NodeSat, 12 Sep 2026 16:27:29 GMTWed, 22 May 2019 09:08:04 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Sat, 10 Aug 2019 08:15:27 GMT]]>When you boot in UEFI mode, press "e" to edit the boot command line, you have a line to change the memory for dom0.

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/15424https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/15424Sat, 10 Aug 2019 08:15:27 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Fri, 09 Aug 2019 22:29:13 GMT]]>@olivierlambert said in XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available!:

Try by reducing dom0 memory in Grub menu

What threadripper exactly?

Do you have a link to a good place to start looking to change that?

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/15420https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/15420Fri, 09 Aug 2019 22:29:13 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Fri, 09 Aug 2019 22:15:41 GMT]]>@olivierlambert AMD RYZEN Threadripper 2920X

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/15419https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/15419Fri, 09 Aug 2019 22:15:41 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Wed, 17 Jul 2019 19:33:37 GMT]]>Try by reducing dom0 memory in Grub menu

What threadripper exactly?

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/14573https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/14573Wed, 17 Jul 2019 19:33:37 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Wed, 17 Jul 2019 19:24:02 GMT]]>@olivierlambert said in XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available!:

Dom0 can't boot here. Likely related to a more recent kernel than in 7.6.

Note that I don't have any issue on a Ryzen 7 (2xxx) nor EPYC.

Anyone else with a 2200G?

@olivierlambert Same here but with a Thread ripper CPU. With XCP-ng 8 RC1, I can get part way and then the "Hardware Dom0 halted: halting machine"

With XCP-ng 7.6, but it gives a Panic on CPU 0 error and stops the install

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/14568https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/14568Wed, 17 Jul 2019 19:24:02 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Thu, 27 Jun 2019 10:14:13 GMT]]>I've installed on a HP ML10 G9 server and all works fine on this server using UEFI based BIOS configuration etc.

The only issue I have found so far is when imported vmdk images using the wizard, even when I choose to set the BIOS to UEFI after the import and conversation has completed the VM won't boot. After looking at the settings for the newly created VM the BIOS is set to BIOS not UEFI.

Simple to resolve either be detaching the storage and removing/recreating the virtual machine and re-attaching the original imported storage. Or I am guessing (although haven't tried yet), using the console to set the machine type.

So possibly an issue with the Import Wizard?

UPDATED

I tried the shell commands to change the imported VM to UEFI, and although initially it looks fine when examining the console and seeing that the BIOS setting has updated. When trying to start the VM it won't boot due to an error. So after detaching the disk and deleting the VM I recreated a new VM using UEFI and no disk attached. Then once created I attached the original imported disk and it works fine.

Also I using VirtualBox to export a VM to OCI Format 1.0 which was setup running as UEFI, after the import into XCP it had changed the BIOS to BIOS not UEFI. So again I followed what I did above and the VM works fine.

So it does look like an issue with the Import Wizard, although it allows you the option to choose BIOS type it doesn't honour the setting and reverts to standard BIOS.

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13835https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13835Thu, 27 Jun 2019 10:14:13 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Tue, 25 Jun 2019 21:17:42 GMT]]>As a sidenote for everyone interested into ZFS: Look at the release notes:
https://github.com/zfsonlinux/zfs/releases

Especially for (my recommended to consider) dedup:

Allocation classes #5182 - Allows a pool to include a small number of high-performance SSD devices that are dedicated to storing specific types of frequently accessed blocks (e.g. metadata, DDT data, or small file blocks). A pool can opt-in to this feature by adding a special or dedup top-level device.

That means RAM is no more critical (for people who didn't have enough): These dater can now 'oflload' to SSDs, whereas special storage types like Intel Optane should be perfect for that, as they can demonstrate their advantages (high IOPS at small queues, durability, access-time).
Optane m.2 cards became pretty affordable - but that feature requires mirroring, so you need 2 of them (I see them priced about 26 € for 16 GB)!

As the satet It's not only for dedup, it can also cover small file blocks and metadata, lowering IOPS on your storage.

ALSO: TRIM/discard support!

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13798https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13798Tue, 25 Jun 2019 21:17:42 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:56:04 GMT]]>HP DL360 v7 with (2) Intel E5649 working good so far. Just finished installation and yum updates and everything came right up, as expected.

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13735https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13735Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:56:04 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:50:15 GMT]]>I think it's a good thing to focus on one "best" tier-one solution, especially on a "small" community like us 🙂

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13729https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13729Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:50:15 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:40:15 GMT]]>Yes, this seems to be the case 😕 But XCP-ng Center will remain as it is, at least.

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13723https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13723Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:40:15 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:38:03 GMT]]>Clearly, adding feature in XCP-ng Center would require a lot of contributions, that's why I don't think it's the future of XCP-ng "client". Having one great client allows to focus all effort instead of "spreading" the thin capabilities on various similar "ways" to administrate it.

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13721https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13721Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:38:03 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Fri, 28 Jun 2019 14:34:00 GMT]]>XCP-ng already ate a bunch of time, and I'm sure it'll continue for testing etc
I'm Sysadmin with very limited coding ability - I'm definately out for that.

I guess it would need someone being good at C#.NET. Also XAPI would probably need to know about it (what may already be, as you're implementing it into XOA)...

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13716https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13716Fri, 28 Jun 2019 14:34:00 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:15:12 GMT]]>XCP-ng Center is only community maintained, so feel free to contribute if you want that inside 🙂

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13713https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13713Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:15:12 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:13:21 GMT]]>My time is (sadly) limited, I can't wacht/monitor everything.
XCP-ng Center? 😉

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13712https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13712Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:13:21 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:12:17 GMT]]>You should really keep an eye on XO dev 😉

https://github.com/vatesfr/xen-orchestra/pull/4266

It's coming this week 🙂

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13711https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13711Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:12:17 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:10:57 GMT]]>New SR -> Type -> ZFS... creatig a new SR via GUI/XCP-ng Center.

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13710https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13710Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:10:57 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:10:11 GMT]]>Find a way to what?

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13709https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13709Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:10:11 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:09:02 GMT]]>I just did the upgrade from 7.6 to 8.0.0 beta via USB-stick (with workaround): I successfully upgraded the existing installation including the softwareraid on the first 2 SSDs.

# cat /proc/mdstat 
Personalities : [raid1] 
md127 : active raid1 sda[0] sdb[1]
      117220736 blocks super 1.0 [2/2] [UU]
      bitmap: 1/1 pages [4KB], 65536KB chunk

Everythings fine, even RAID survived. ZFS stuff will come later. Would be good if that would find a way into XCP-ng Center (is it in XOA yet?) for easier management. Likewise for Ext4.

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13706https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13706Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:09:02 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Mon, 24 Jun 2019 11:58:37 GMT]]>@stormi said in XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available!:

You could test with Citrix Hypervisor and then report it at https://bugs.xenserver.org
Maybe they'll want to investigate even if the hardware is not officially supported. If someone can reproduce the issue on supported hardware, that would make things easier.

Though I doubt it was woth the effort, as the support over there is well known (especially for not supported configurations etc.) I did it - for the reason of trying to improve stuff (and giving back to OSS community):
https://bugs.xenserver.org/projects/XSO/issues/XSO-955

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13684https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13684Mon, 24 Jun 2019 11:58:37 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Mon, 24 Jun 2019 10:04:54 GMT]]>@cg said in XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available!:

I created an issue, IMHO it would be good if the problem itself makes it to upstream to either bump someone to fix it or get feedback that problem is known/fixed in version X.Y.Z.

Thanks for creating the issue.

You could test with Citrix Hypervisor and then report it at https://bugs.xenserver.org
Maybe they'll want to investigate even if the hardware is not officially supported. If someone can reproduce the issue on supported hardware, that would make things easier.

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13671https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13671Mon, 24 Jun 2019 10:04:54 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Mon, 24 Jun 2019 10:00:03 GMT]]>@cg said in XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available!:

https://forum.opsi.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=10611 Et al.

I created an issue, IMHO it would be good if the problem itself makes it to upstream to either bump someone to fix it or get feedback that problem is known/fixed in version X.Y.Z.

For reference:
https://github.com/xcp-ng/xcp/issues/206

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13670https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13670Mon, 24 Jun 2019 10:00:03 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Mon, 24 Jun 2019 09:29:25 GMT]]>Looks like the best way to me 🙂

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13660https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13660Mon, 24 Jun 2019 09:29:25 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available! on Mon, 24 Jun 2019 09:16:59 GMT]]>At this stage, I'd rather document the issue to help people workaround it than change the default values inherited from Citrix (who tested the installer on a lot of hardware). I also suggest to open an issue at https://github.com/xcp-ng/xcp/issues so that other users that would meet the same issue could share their experience and let us try to estimate whether it's a widely spread issue or something very specific to some hardware.

]]>https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13656https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/13656Mon, 24 Jun 2019 09:16:59 GMT