XCP-ng

    • Register
    • Login
    • Search
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups

    XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available!

    News
    24
    123
    33848
    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.
    • apayne
      apayne last edited by

      It's a little strange to see older but capable CPUs dropped from the list. The old Opteron 2356 I have didn't make the cut, even though it works just fine in 7.6. I'm still going to try out 8.0 anyways.

      I understand that vendors don't want to "extend support forever" but it's silly when you have 10+ year old hardware that runs fine, and the only limitation really comes down to "hardware feature XYZ is a requirement". But so far, I've not seen the actual minimum CPU requirement; which makes me a bit suspicious about "it won't run".

      D 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • D
        DustinB @apayne last edited by

        @apayne said in XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available!:

        Opteron 2356

        That's a 12 year old CPU so I don't see any issue with dropping it.

        apayne 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • apayne
          apayne @DustinB last edited by

          @DustinB said in XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available!:

          That's a 12 year old CPU so I don't see any issue with dropping it.

          As I said, 10+ year old hardware; and I also said, I get that vendors want to draw lines in the sand so they don't end up supporting everything under the sun. It's good business sense to limit expenditures to equipment that is commonly used.

          But my (poorly articulated from the last posting) point remains: there isn't a known or posted reason why the software forces me to drop the CPU. Citrix just waved their hands and said "these don't work anymore". Well, I suspect it really does work, and this is just the side-effect of a vendor cost-cutting decision for support that has nothing to do with XCP-ng, but unfortunately impacts it anyways. So it's worth a try, and if it fails, so be it - at least there will be a known reason why, instead of the Citrix response of "nothing to see here, move along..."

          XCP-ng is a killer deal, probably THE killer deal when viewed through the lens of a home lab.
          That makes it hard to justify shelling out money for Windows Hyper-V or VMWare when there is a family to feed and rent to pay. Maybe that explains why I am so keen on seeing if Citrix really did make changes that prevent it from running.

          Fail or succeed, either way, it'll be more information to be contributed back to the community here, and something will be learned. That's a positive outcome all the way around.

          C 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • olivierlambert
            olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder🦸 CEO πŸ§‘β€πŸ’Ό last edited by

            Regarding Citrix choice: I think they can't really publicly communicate about the reasons. It might be related to security issues and some CPU vendors not upgrading microcodes anymore.

            That's why it should work technically speaking, but Citrix won't be liable for any security breach due to an "old" CPU.

            Regarding XCP-ng: as long as it just works, and you don't pay for support, I think you'll be fine for your home lab πŸ™‚

            Please report if you have any issue with 8.0 on your old hardware, we'll try to help as far as we could.

            apayne 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
            • C
              cocoon XCP-ng Center Team 🏚️ last edited by

              My experience with "XOA Quick Deploy"

              It failed.

              Because I need to use a proxy, I opened an issue here:
              https://github.com/xcp-ng/xcp/issues/193

              cocoon created this issue in xcp-ng/xcp

              open XOA Quick Deploy with Proxy #193

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • A
                AllooTikeeChaat last edited by AllooTikeeChaat

                Installed fine on one of my Intel X56XX based system and the system boots into XCP 8.0 although the zfs local storage wasn't mounted and a repair fails as well.

                cbb9b852-0974-4a85-9d90-e309446d28e6-image.png

                modprobe zfs fails with "module zfs not found"

                Is there any updated ZFS documentation for 8.0 that would help?

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • stormi
                  stormi Vates πŸͺ XCP-ng Team πŸš€ last edited by stormi

                  zfs is not part of the default installation, so you need to install it manually using yum from our repositories. Documentation on the wiki has not been updated yet for 8.0: https://github.com/xcp-ng/xcp/wiki/ZFS-on-XCP-ng
                  Now the zfs packages are directly in our main repositories, no need to add extra --enablerepo options. Just yum install zfs.

                  I've just built an updated zfs package (new major version 0.8.0 instead of the 0.7.3 that was initially available in the repos for the beta) in the hope that it solves some of the issues we had with previous versions (such as VDI export or the need to patch some packages to remove the use of O_DIRECT). I'm just waiting for the main mirror to sync to test that it installs fine.

                  A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                  • A
                    AllooTikeeChaat @stormi last edited by

                    @stormi Thanks for the quick reply .. tried the yum install zfs and it errors with the following:

                    75afeaef-9101-4357-9f6e-f257e35cab8d-image.png

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • stormi
                      stormi Vates πŸͺ XCP-ng Team πŸš€ last edited by

                      That's why I told that I'm waiting for the main mirror to sync πŸ™‚
                      And the build machine is having a "I'm feeling all slow" moment.

                      A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • A
                        AllooTikeeChaat @stormi last edited by

                        @stormi Ok..... silly me .. will wait for you to give the aok.

                        stormi 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • stormi
                          stormi Vates πŸͺ XCP-ng Team πŸš€ @AllooTikeeChaat last edited by

                          @AllooTikeeChaat You can now try.

                          A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • A
                            AllooTikeeChaat @stormi last edited by

                            @stormi still broken .. same error

                            2af95434-078c-4afd-9fab-9e9b20efad5d-image.png

                            stormi 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • stormi
                              stormi Vates πŸͺ XCP-ng Team πŸš€ @AllooTikeeChaat last edited by

                              @AllooTikeeChaat yum considers that your medata are recent enough. Ask it to clean them: yum clean all.

                              A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                              • A
                                AllooTikeeChaat @stormi last edited by AllooTikeeChaat

                                @stormi yum clean all worked. Installed aok and modprobe zfs doesn't complain so that's all good.

                                A repair of the ZFS SR fails with the same error and "zpool status: no pools available" and "zfs list no datasets available".

                                I'll open a new post if I can't get it working rather than replying to this one.

                                Update: fixed the issue ..

                                bad2f941-78f1-482b-ae10-a663b4a01928-image.png

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • olivierlambert
                                  olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder🦸 CEO πŸ§‘β€πŸ’Ό last edited by

                                  Which was? (the issue)

                                  A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • A
                                    AllooTikeeChaat @olivierlambert last edited by

                                    @olivierlambert
                                    (1) Missing the ZFS packages from the base install.
                                    (2) Needed a "yum clean all" to be able to install zfs packages.
                                    (3) Needed to manually import the ZFS zpool

                                    I'm a noob with zfs so had to work out how to import an existing zpool and once thats done it can be repaired/mounted.

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                    • olivierlambert
                                      olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder🦸 CEO πŸ§‘β€πŸ’Ό last edited by

                                      Good πŸ™‚ So now you are on ZoL 0.8, no need to disable sync anymore πŸ™‚

                                      A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • A
                                        AllooTikeeChaat @olivierlambert last edited by

                                        @olivierlambert
                                        I'm assuming that sync is enabled by default ?

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • olivierlambert
                                          olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder🦸 CEO πŸ§‘β€πŸ’Ό last edited by

                                          Yup, but before (0.8) it wasn't good for performances, at all, due to cache poisoning (no O_DIRECT support).

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                          • C
                                            cocoon XCP-ng Center Team 🏚️ last edited by

                                            Any chance to get a newer lsblk that supports json output?
                                            Would be great for plugins and would make parsing output much easier.

                                            Currently installed on XCP-ng 8 beta: util-linux-2.23.2-52.el7_5.1.x86_64

                                            (something later than v2.27?)
                                            https://git.devuan.org/CenturionDan/util-linux/commit/4a102a4871fdb415f4de5af9ffb7a2fb8926b5d1

                                            ... ah forget it, I see, CentOS is using the old versions since long time ...

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