[WARNING] XCP-ng Center shows wrong CITRIX updates for XCP-ng Servers - DO NOT APPLY - Fix released
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.
@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
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!
S.Pam last edited by
@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
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
That's why you'll have XOLite: no extra VM to deploy to manage your host.
There's no reason you can't have a web UI that's as fast as an heavy client.
@olivierlambert Yeah this is exciting. And for single host setups hopefully, during a system rebuild/restore, we will be able to use XO Lite to attach the host to our backup repos and restore all VMs from backups. All without having to install the xcp-ng Center or install a XO VM.
No, XOLite won't be able to deal with backups. It's not its job. Think it as a replacement of XCP-ng Center or XOA Free.
@olivierlambert Ah ok, darn. Was hopeful that would be one of the features.
No matter. Still excited to see the product.
Also you don't have to "install" anything to restore backup, a freshly imported XOA will do it easily
@olivierlambert If one is running XO from sources in a single host system and having to do a full host recovery, what is the method to re-attach to the backup repo in order to recover VMs? XOA isn't an option in this scenario is it? Does XOA free allow you to import VM backups?
Just do once a VM export of your VM hosting XO, keep the XVA somewhere. If you lose your host, just import that XVA with
xefor example, and that's it