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

    Accedentally set up a pool on an xcp-ng server

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Xen Orchestra
    29 Posts 7 Posters 12.8k Views 3 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.
    • D Offline
      DannieRothmann @stormi
      last edited by

      stormi
      Ok, I stand corrected, but then its not only a XCP/Xencenter issue. xsconsole also clearly differentiates between being member of a pool or not ? I know that there is always a "master", but either of a stand alone server or of a pool.

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

        DannieRothmann About xsconsole (which is supported), where do you see a difference between "in a pool" and "not in a pool"?

        D 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • D Offline
          DannieRothmann @stormi
          last edited by

          stormi
          Standalone:
          NoPool.PNG

          Single server (New pool created):
          OneServerInPool.PNG

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

            Thanks. So there must be a difference somewhere in database or on the host itself. I suspect the only goal behind this was to make believe the host isn't in a pool in order to not confuse users who'd expect that no pool exists when there's only one host... And the result is it's still confusing because now we can have two different setups that are completely identical except that one claims there's no pool and the other says there is 🙂

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

            D 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • D Offline
              DannieRothmann @stormi
              last edited by

              stormi

              I agree, confusing.

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

              🙂

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

                There's no diff. It's just that if you pool doesn't have a namelabel, XenCenter and xsconsole will detect that and tell you it's not in a pool. It's just a plain lie.

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

                  DannieRothmann

                  J 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • J Offline
                    jensolsson.se @olivierlambert
                    last edited by

                    olivierlambert Interesting is it possible to simply remove the namelabel. I know it does not matter but I think it is nice to do the same on all hosts

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

                      @jensolsson-se I'd try with xe pool-param-set [...]. Find the appropriate param name with xe pool-param-list. Disclaimer: I did not check if it's possible.

                      J 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • J Offline
                        jensolsson.se @stormi
                        last edited by

                        stormi Thanks, it was easily solved and now there is no extra step in XCP-ng center

                        [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.

                        D 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • D Offline
                          DannieRothmann @jensolsson.se
                          last edited by

                          @jensolsson-se said in Accedentally set up a pool on an xcp-ng server:

                          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.

                          C 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • C Offline
                            churchers @DannieRothmann
                            last edited by churchers

                            When you change network settings it asks if you want to push the name set to DNS or XCP (can't remember they direction), anyway this is your host DNS, when you set the network management in xsconsole you can get it renamed and then match the XCP name.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • T Offline
                              tuxen Top contributor
                              last edited by

                              Just FYI guys, XenCenter/XCP-ng Center have the menu option Pool > Make into standalone server. As pointed out by other members, every standalone host is in a pool, but that option reverts to an "implicit" one.

                              Hope this helps.

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

                                But why on earth doing that, the client is just lying to the user 🤔 Eager to get rid of this forever.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • T Offline
                                  tuxen Top contributor
                                  last edited by

                                  That's a question for the Citrix dev team 😉

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

                                    I think they assumed that their average user was not able to grasp the concept of a pool with a single host 🤔

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • T Offline
                                      tuxen Top contributor
                                      last edited by

                                      It could be. For an user point of view, a single host pool wouldn't make any sense, so they created the "implicit/explicit" concept and treated everything as a pool internally.

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

                                        I agree but when it's not the truth "behind", I find it even more confusing.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • First post
                                          Last post