[WARNING] XCP-ng Center shows wrong CITRIX updates for XCP-ng Servers - DO NOT APPLY - Fix released
-
@borzel only who do nothing can't do wrong. keep up with the good work and make treasure of your mistakes!
-
@borzel said in [WARNING] XCP-ng Center shows wrong CITRIX updates for XCP-ng Servers - DO NOT APPLY - Fix released:
XCP-ng Center
Pretty please do not abandon XCP-ng Center! There are BASIC things XCP-ng Center does that XOA free does not. For example, cloning a VM cannot be done with free XOA.
-
I don't have any insider knowledge, but I gotta believe Vates will have to pull the plug on xcp-ng Center at some point. Its another source of bug entry (as we just witnessed) and requires extra manpower. I'd rather them throw more of their time into XOA since that is their "official" management software.
Why not just built XO for yourself from sources if you need to do more than the free version of XOA allows?
-
I understand they will have to pull the plug on xcp-ng Center at some point and I will have build XO from sources. I do hope XO's views improve and work better, because they can be quite frustrating now. Its the nature of a web interface, and I understand there are challenges there, but if there is no choice but to use XO then the challenge is even greater.
However, I say XO(A) is a fantastic product and I have tried to make the math work for us and pay for it. I still can't swing it, partly because you need Enterprise Edition to make a simple clone.
I am exceedingly grateful any of this exists at all, and I thank everyone who have made it possible!!!
-
- Why not using XO from the sources?
- Fast clone shouldn't be restricted to Enterprise, sounds more like a bug than anything else. In short, XOA Free should cover all features of XCP-ng Center.
- We also have possible plans for XO lite, a "XCP-ng Center" like embed in the host UI directly.
-
- While I am capable of using XO from sources, I value the work that has gone into XOA and feel guilty running from source
- I am glad to hear you say this, as I found it odd to require Enterprise. Should I file a bug report?
- +1 for an XO lite!
I will also repeat, THANK YOU to you and your team for your work. It pains me to read posts questioning your reasons to charge A,B,C for X,Y,Z, and I am on your camp. You need to make it viable... Hence my apprehension to use XO from sources.
- While I am capable of using XO from sources, I value the work that has gone into XOA and feel guilty running from source
-
No worries @hvilches and thanks for your support and feedback!
Please open an issue on XO GH bug tracker regarding clone feature, it should be available in XOA Free. If you spot other "basic" features like that restricted, please report
-
The tree-view in Center is far better than any overview I can find in XO.
Starting, stopping, restarting a VM is fast and natural to do in that tree view.That makes Center useful for occasional users, that have to find a way to solve a problem, where XO is targetted at the pro user, who knows how to solve his problem before he starts.
Just to join a new server I get confused every time, and end at a place, where I have to enter its password permanently, which seems wrong.With Windows on the workstation you have the chicken/egg problem. I run XOce in Virtualbox on my laptop. Not simple compared to Center.
XO is not cheap, and if that forces you into XOce there is confusion between the 3 versions XO, XOA and XOce, dubbed up with different ways to install XOce.
XOlite embedded in the Xcp-ng-host might change things.
-
- XO6 will be the next UI for XO, using a tree view among other things
- I don't understand about adding the host password?
- No chicken egg problem: you can deploy XOA from Xen Orchestra website. Why not doing that?
- Anyway, XOlite will solve all of this
-
@olivierlambert Oliver - do you guys have a feature request tracking page for XO6? I would really like to give some real-world (production) viewpoints to your next tool. Like other people, I have to switch between both tools (XO and XO Center) to get my job done, thus, I am hoping the version will help avoid that problem.
-
There's various stuff around:
- https://github.com/vatesfr/xen-orchestra/issues/4446
- https://github.com/vatesfr/xen-orchestra/issues/3971
- https://github.com/vatesfr/xen-orchestra/issues/3907
And a milestone: https://github.com/vatesfr/xen-orchestra/milestone/36
-
@olivierlambert Thanks Oliver! Let me know if you are interested in any BETA testers. I would be happy to join your beta user's group...
-
As soon we got something usable, we'll have probably another extra "route" in XO URL, like
/betaor/v6or something -
I hope that the next XO UI includes way to handle large amount of VMs easily.
Currently, we have hundreds of VMs running. If for example, I want to start, stop, migrate or w/e large amount of them with a single command, that is only possible from the Center. XO only shows 20 VMs at once.
For us, there is also second problem with using XO only, because XO is hosted on the Xen server itself, so if Xen server is in maintenance then we cannot access XO interface - of course that could be avoided by adding isolated machine running XO, but up until now we have been to lazy to do it - mainly because of the problem described above
Otherwise XO is a great product, and we use it for everything else.
-
@Zaiban that's not true! The UI is made to handle thousands of VMs!
It's just that you think to change your mind and use filters
Filters are life, filters are THE way to handles tons of objects. Not displayed infinite number of them. Note that you can now even display 100 objects in recent XO release.So please reconsider your workflow before telling you can't do something
-
Okay sorry, maybe I have been lazy at something else too like skipping the documentation. I'll do more research and learn to use properly.
Thanks for pointing it out
And another for making such a great product. We have been using from sources until now, because in our University its a hard process of getting any licenses approved for purchase. Maybe in the future I can do something about that.
-
I think that's because there's a misconception: XO is NOT a clone of XCP-ng Center and was never meant to be one.
It's like telling Linux desktop usage is inferior to Windows, just because you have to change some habits
But it doesn't mean we aren't listening: new UI will get all the constructive feedback we had since a while!
-
@olivierlambert When is the new XO 6 out? I'm eager to see it
-
@pdonias just started to work on a first implementation. Be sure you'll have news as soon we got something
-
@Biggen said in [WARNING] XCP-ng Center shows wrong CITRIX updates for XCP-ng Servers - DO NOT APPLY - Fix released:
This is the reason I think xcp-ng Center should be abandoned and a prebuilt/stripped down XOA should be provided and take its place. People can then upgrade to a full blown XOA if they wish.
Having to maintain two points of entry seems a waste of resources and fraught with another way bugs could enter the system.
Glad you caught it!
XCP-NG Center is the Best interface GUI that I never seen for an hypervisor, simple fastest we see everything we need, the console is large, dont need to click 1000 time to find informations... Thanks to development team to continue to provide this soft, I use XCP-NG because this interface exist, I dont really like the New Web interface mode in our century, slow, refresh thé Web page, bug, slow console... Lot of Web in our century, it is an error to put everything in Web mode, like to put everything in the cloud, and have à management interface out of the hypervisor is smart, because if your internal management interface in VM MODE is broken, and if you dont have other solution, your dead
