Hope this helps.

xcp-ng-btdjnqqd

Is seems like the "name" xcp-ng-btdjnqqd is the autogenerated name suggested during installation.

This becomes the "name" of the server, but there is also a "name-label", which is what you see in most places of both the XCP-ng center and XO.

If you look in xsconsole, you will most likely see this "name" i the top right corner of the screen.

[16:57 xcp-ng-btdjnqqd ~]# xe pool-list
uuid ( RO)                : 1f12bb2e-3138-36fd-bfc7-a572186271cf
          name-label ( RW): xcp-ng-3
    name-description ( RW): 
              master ( RO): 08a4a440-3c00-4d5e-af8c-46dd412a32cc
          default-SR ( RW): e5b243b2-28ba-31e8-6c8c-c0ab5e9d1c23


[16:57 xcp-ng-btdjnqqd ~]# xe pool-param-set
Required parameter not found: uuid
For usage run: 'xe help'
[16:58 xcp-ng-btdjnqqd ~]# xe pool-param-set uuid=1f12bb2e-3138-36fd-bfc7-a572186271cf name-label=
[16:58 xcp-ng-btdjnqqd ~]# xe pool-list
uuid ( RO)                : 1f12bb2e-3138-36fd-bfc7-a572186271cf
          name-label ( RW): 
    name-description ( RW): 
              master ( RO): 08a4a440-3c00-4d5e-af8c-46dd412a32cc
          default-SR ( RW): e5b243b2-28ba-31e8-6c8c-c0ab5e9d1c23


[16:58 xcp-ng-btdjnqqd ~]# 

I wonder why it has named itself xcp-ng-btdjnqqd when I set its name to xcp-ng-3. Everything in XCP-ng center and in XO sais xcp-ng-3 but not in the command prompt.

I agree, confusing.

• Would be easier the Starwars way:
  "Always two, there are. No more. No less. A Master and a pool"

I suppose /etc/xensource/pool.conf contains master in both cases? That's what I see here.

Single server (New pool created):

I actually think that this is one of these situations that totally frustrates a trainer, where what the trainer see in all official training materials (Citrix) and what you actually see in the source code.

@stormi you know the code far better than me, so when you say it

• I will rephrase:
  Even though it looks like there is a difference in both XCP/Xencenter and xsconsole, there is actually no difference in the actual system behind the interfaces.
• As long as you work with XCP/XS consoles, my previous comment is what you see and experience when using these unsupported tools !
• If you use the servers for production, there is only ONE tool you can rely on .... Xen Orchestra .... (and the support is outstanding)

You could check in XO, which reflects the exact state of things in the XAPI database: any host belongs to a pool. Always.

• When a server is added in XCP-ng Center or Citrix XenCenter, it IS stand alone, we have many of these in production - not a problem.
• You have to create a pool or add it to an existing pool, to make it a member, so the xcp-.ng-3 is no longer a stand alone server, it is the master of a pool called xcp-ng-3 - not a problem.
• To remove it from the pool again - BIG problem, because you can not remove the master from a pool. You can destroy the pool by "hacking" and you will loose all VM's on local storage ! - BAD IDEA
• Leaving it as is looks a little strange, but has absolutely NO impact on the servers functionallity or reliabillity.
• So either "backup VM, reinstall server, do not create a pool and restore vm" OR Just live with it as is

Jens

So you are saying I can pretty much ignore this unusual look of my xcp-ng-3 server?