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

    XCP-ng 8.2 updates announcements and testing

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved News
    703 Posts 67 Posters 1.1m Views 86 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.
    • A Online
      Andrew Top contributor @gduperrey
      last edited by

      @gduperrey I jumped in all the way by mistake... I updated a wrong host, so I just did them all. Older AMD, Intel E3/E5, NUC11, etc. So far, so good. Add/migrate/backup/etc VMs are working as usual. Good for guest tools too, but mine are mostly Debian 7-11. Stuff is as usual so far.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 5
      • gduperreyG Offline
        gduperrey Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team @Louis
        last edited by gduperrey

        @Louis,

        The updates are unrelated to your issue.
        You are welcome to start a new thread about it.
        That way, rather than commenting in this thread, you will receive greater assistance from the community.

        Did you look at the wiki's troubleshooting page to analyze your issue?
        https://xcp-ng.org/docs/troubleshooting.html#the-3-step-guide

        We don't see anything in your lsblk. Perhaps you could include the 'xe sr-list' result in your new topic.

        Have you tried to create your SR using XOA or just the server's command line?

        We don't offer an updated installer right now. Although we're working on a method to regularly and automatically build an updated iso. It will take some time before we can use it for the community.

        As we know, ZFS is supported, some users use it. What exactly do you mean by zfs support?

        L 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
        • L Offline
          Louis @gduperrey
          last edited by

          @gduperrey

          I did post here, because I am almost sure that I am facing serious bugs in the actual version. Of course I can be wrong, however I do think that the described problems are not related to things I am doing wrong. So it is more that I intended to make the team aware of the problems, then that I think I need help .....

          Because I assume bugs, I did upgrade intermediately after the install, .... however, that did not solve the noted issues ...

          I also installed Ubuntu in an VM on my windows10 system and compiled XOA. And tryed to generate storage from there, which not so strange, did lead to the same error messages seen before (I tried to define storage types EXT and ZFS).

          Related to ZFS, I wrote that since I did read some were that it was not yet formally supported.

          Note that my server does have disks installed (not intended for XCP-ng). The disks are ZFS storage pools active when I boot the server as TrueNAS server. That should not be a problem .... IMHO.
          Note that I can not detach them, since it also involves NVME-drivers on the motherboard.
          Also note that the SSD use for XCP-ng has been used for other purposes before probably including ZFS-partitions. I write that here because I noted people reporting issues related to disks previously used for ZFS.

          stormiS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • J Offline
            JeffBerntsen Top contributor @gduperrey
            last edited by

            @gduperrey
            Applied on my test systems and all seems to be working well here.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 3
            • stormiS Offline
              stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team @Louis
              last edited by

              @Louis There's no immediate evidence that the update candidates that this thread is about are related to your issues, so I second @gduperrey's request that you open one or more separate threads for your issues.

              Expected feedback in this thread is something like : "I was on a fully updated XCP-ng 8.2.1 pool which worked well and then I installed the update candidates, and now I notice something doesn't work anymore" (regression due to the update candidates) or "I have tested this and that after installing the update candidates, and it looks fine".

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
              • A Offline
                AlexD2006
                last edited by

                Updated and tested:

                • one single Host
                • lab-Pool (3 Hosts) - NFS Storage
                • lab-Pool (4 Hosts) - iscsi Storage

                Everthing seems to work as expected.
                (new VM, live-migration, snapshots, clone VMs, import/export VMs)

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 4
                • A Offline
                  Ajmind 0
                  last edited by

                  updated and tested:

                  test pool (2 hosts) iscsi storage
                  no problems so far.
                  (live-migration, snapshots, changed master in pool)

                  guest tools updated on
                  Debian 10 / 11 / Rocky Linux 8.5

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 4
                  • A Offline
                    AlexD2006
                    last edited by

                    Sorry for my impatience. 🙂
                    Is there any news on ETA?

                    We are actually planning a maintenance downtime for firmware Upgrades and some other changes on a bunch of hosts and it would be cool do the updates on the same time slot to avoid double reboot/shutdown in short time.

                    Kind Regards
                    Alex

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

                      Ping @stormi

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • stormiS Offline
                        stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
                        last edited by

                        If no last minute issue is discovered with the updates, they should be released next week.

                        A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 4
                        • A Offline
                          AlexD2006 @stormi
                          last edited by

                          @stormi
                          Thx for your reply. 🙂
                          I try to wait so i can do it all in one Task.

                          Kind Regards
                          Alex

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • gduperreyG Offline
                            gduperrey Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
                            last edited by

                            The update is published. Thanks for your tests!

                            Blog post: https://xcp-ng.org/blog/2022/10/05/october-2022-maintenance-update/

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 3
                            • L Offline
                              Louis
                              last edited by

                              I am completely lost in relation to the way new software or updates are released.

                              • If I download the actual file, I get exactly the same file as I used to get for months
                              • there is an 8.2.1 which is not visual in the release overview
                              • I would have expect that an update has the name 8.2.2 ........

                              So, I am lost .....

                              R 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • R Offline
                                ravenet @Louis
                                last edited by

                                @Louis said in Updates announcements and testing:

                                I am completely lost in relation to the way new software or updates are released.

                                • If I download the actual file, I get exactly the same file as I used to get for months
                                • there is an 8.2.1 which is not visual in the release overview
                                • I would have expect that an update has the name 8.2.2 ........

                                So, I am lost .....

                                This is not a major release triggering a dot version update. This is a set of patches.

                                yum update

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • L Offline
                                  Louis
                                  last edited by

                                  IMHO every set of patches should lead to a new version number and a changed initial download,
                                  so if this is only a small update than it could be 8.2.1.1

                                  My opinion of course but I would like to see a far more traceable update process

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

                                    Take a look at what other distros are doing: at some point, Debian will add a new "patch version". Initially you had Debian 11.0, but after some time and patches added, there's a bump (now we are at Debian 11.5).

                                    There's not a patch increment at each update released 🙂

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • L Offline
                                      Louis
                                      last edited by

                                      This is not a new available patch like the ones which become available on any OS every day!

                                      It is a tested set of patches which become available as a "package". So I stay which my opinion that it is lets say a "dot-release". With a new number, a new download and a version history.

                                      And yep of course you can update via the regular update method .

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

                                        @Louis said in Updates announcements and testing:

                                        This is not a new available patch like the ones which become available on any OS every day!

                                        Why? It's exactly that. It's up to us to decide if we want to group them more or less (depending on the urgency of the patch) but that's entirely on us.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • stormiS Offline
                                          stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
                                          last edited by

                                          The only reason we group them is so that you get notifications about available patches less often, as they're not security patches nor urgent fixes. We could also have released them as soon as they were ready, but you would have had to update more often.

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • stormiS Offline
                                            stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team @Louis
                                            last edited by

                                            @Louis said in Updates announcements and testing:

                                            IMHO every set of patches should lead to a new version number and a changed initial download,
                                            so if this is only a small update than it could be 8.2.1.1

                                            My opinion of course but I would like to see a far more traceable update process

                                            Changing version numbers may have unwanted adverse effects in third party software which interacts with XCP-ng and relies on versions to determine whether they consider themselves compatible or not. This happened with cloudstack and the 8.2.1 release, which was nothing but an updated 8.2 LTS. Each time a version number changes, they think they need to qualify the solution again. So I would not change version numbers lightly. Plus, when version numbers change, users may think there were more changes than just a maintenance update of the LTS release, and be wary of updating.

                                            Regarding updated ISO images each time we release patches, we might do this automatically at some point in the future. But an updated installer image must be fully re-tested each time there's a change. It's not as simple as just bumping a version number and updating a few packages in an ISO image.

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