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

    XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available!

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved News
    123 Posts 24 Posters 176.7k Views 6 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.
    • P
      peder @olivierlambert
      last edited by

      @olivierlambert The VM that fails migration seems to have been created in xcp-ng 7.6 using the "Other Media" template.
      I made a new VM in xcp-ng 8 using the CentOS7 template and I can migrate that just fine with a larger static max.

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

        Can you provide the full VM record of the problematic one? with

        vm param-list uuid=<YOUR FAILING VM UUID>

        Also the same with the one now working, so I can compare.

        P 1 Reply Last reply
        Reply Quote 0
        • P
          peder @olivierlambert
          last edited by

          @olivierlambert Sure.
          I've put the param-list logs as well as the VMs (sans the Disk) on https://student.oedu.se/~peder/xcp-ng/

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

            So I imported your VM metadata in my lab pool, attached to a VM disk with Debian (so we don't really care about the OS) and it worked 😆

            I also attached a disk of a previously working CentOS 7 VM, same thing: migration worked 🐹

            1 Reply Last reply
            Reply Quote 0
            • P
              peder
              last edited by

              Weird.

              Maybe it's due to the hardware I'm using. I only have 8 GB RAM in the servers but the migration fails even if I'm not running any other VM.
              And since it works if static max=dynamic max it shouldn't be a RAM case either.

              Unless the migration for some reason tries to allocate 2-3 times the amount of RAM if static and dynamic max differ.

              1 Reply Last reply
              Reply Quote 0
              • s_mcleodS
                s_mcleod @MajorTom
                last edited by

                @MajorTom Sorry about that I've been (and still am AFK):

                Corrected link: https://github.com/sammcj/benchmark_results/blob/master/xcpng/8/hyperthreading_impact/test_2_sysbench_prime.md

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

                  Folks... was at Citrix event today and the morning was a talk by LoginVSI looking at the impact of the latest security patches for Intel CPU's and the performance impact server on EUC work loads and server scalebility on the Hypervisors. According to the presenter all the Hypervisors (Hyper-V, VMware ESX and XenServer) that they were testing were seeing approx 20-25% decrease in performance when using Intel based systems. What I found interesting was VMware has developed a new scheduler, SCAv2 to help reduce the impact although no numbers where mentioned. There was no mention of anything of th sort for XenServer or HyperV.

                  https://blogs.vmware.com/performance/2019/05/new-scheduler-option-for-vsphere-6-7-u2.html

                  According to that blog post .. the impact using the SCAv2 was reduced to 11%.

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

                    This will come in Xen. In fact, work already started. It's called "core scheduling", and this is the preliminary work before sync scheduling, which is a perfect solution (better perfs AND better security) against Intel CPU flaws.

                    Source: https://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2019-05/msg00370.html

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

                      @olivierlambert

                      Good to know that they're already working on it for Xen. Surprised that none of the Citrix bod's at the event mentioned it. Looks like the best way to do get around the massive performance hit without switching to AMD !

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

                        @AllooTikeeChaat I'm always stunned by the fact Citrix communication on Xen is equal to /dev/null, despite all the great efforts made by the Xen devs (half of them are from Citrix!)

                        So as I said, it's not there yet, but it's going into that direction pretty well, I would expect this stuff to be backported in the future I suppose, because it's really powerful!

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        Reply Quote 0
                        • D
                          dariosplit
                          last edited by

                          When will the final version of XCP-ng 8.0.0. be available?

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

                            This will depend a bit on community feedback: more feedback means faster release 🙂

                            s_mcleodS 1 Reply Last reply
                            Reply Quote 1
                            • s_mcleodS
                              s_mcleod @olivierlambert
                              last edited by

                              @olivierlambert I’m sorry I’m not more available to bring more testing to the table this week, I am AFK.

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

                                No worries mate! To give a more precise answer, we might target a RC for the end of the month, maybe sooner, IDK yet.

                                Then if there is no big issue spotted with the RC, release will come near after 🙂

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                Reply Quote 0
                                • P
                                  peder
                                  last edited by

                                  Connecting an iSCSI SR in xsconsole fails if there's a discovery password.
                                  It works if I disable the authentication.

                                  It works in XenOrchestra if I attach it as a new SR (With auth) AND have the same discovery username and password in the ACL of the iqn.
                                  That still doesn't work in xsconsole.

                                  My iscsi server uses targetcli-fb/LIO.

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

                                    Is it something broken before? Because I don't think we ever touched xsconsole outside colors

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    Reply Quote 0
                                    • s_mcleodS
                                      s_mcleod
                                      last edited by

                                      I’ve fairly certain I’ve had this problem since xenserver 6.x

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

                                        Okay so this issue could be opened somewhere, but IMHO it shouldn't be a blocker for the release 🙂

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        Reply Quote 0
                                        • P
                                          peder
                                          last edited by

                                          I used tgt and no authentication before so I can't say.
                                          I decided to try targetcli and authentication when I installed 8 beta.

                                          No, it's probably not a blocker.

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

                                            @olivierlambert Go figure - just two days after that posting, my creaky old HP DL365 Gen1 up and died. CPU 1 memory bank shows a solid set of lights for RAM sockets, i.e. the memory controller can't access RAM. Bummer.

                                            My wife took pity on me - or got me a father's day gift, depending on your point of view - and sprung for a Dell R815, which is supported. Of course, I gave the 8.0 beta a spin.

                                            Installation was slightly faster, but there have been a few minor quirks along the way:

                                            • The USB key I stuck into the unit wasn't an option for the OS install, but did show up as an option when creating storage for VMs. No big deal, but still kinda strange.
                                            • Peeking at a different console via Alt-F2 and Alt-F3 showed some patches? And the kernel/dracut root/boot installation section took a loooong time to complete; everything else flew by. If it's downloading those patches that would explain the delay - the unit has a slow wifi bridge connection.

                                            Other than those, it seems fine. I'm still poking around it, getting a few for what's changed.

                                            stormiS borzelB 2 Replies Last reply
                                            Reply Quote 0

                                            Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.

                                            Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.

                                            With your input, this post could be even better 💗

                                            Register Login
                                            • First post
                                              Last post