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

    XenServer 8.0 - Major update due Q1 2019

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Development
    89 Posts 18 Posters 61.2k Views 5 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.
    • akurzawaA Offline
      akurzawa
      last edited by

      Just wondering strongly if xcp-ng will support disks bigger than 2TBs

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

        I think there is a lot of conversations around this forum about this 🙂 SMAPIv3 is able to use qcow2 instead of VHD, allowing to get rid of the 2TiB limit.

        However, SMAPIv3 is far from being production ready now. See the dev diary in News section 🙂

        C 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • C Offline
          cg @olivierlambert
          last edited by

          @olivierlambert said in XenServer 8.0 - Major update due Q1 2019:

          However, SMAPIv3 is far from being production ready now. See the dev diary in News section 🙂

          We all wait for updates 😜

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • stormiS Offline
            stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team @gangsterrapper22
            last edited by

            @gangsterrapper22 Thanks. The reason why we restrict corosync in the license daemon is to avoid XCP-ng Center advertise it as available when it isn't.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
            • D Offline
              dkleva
              last edited by

              Still max 32 vcpu limit per VM. This is too litle!

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

                This is not a real limit: we even unlocked this artificial limit in Xen Orchestra.

                It's 128 in HVM guest, see https://wiki.xenproject.org/wiki/Xen_Project_Release_Features

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • C Offline
                  cg
                  last edited by cg

                  You should consider, that efficiency of vCPUs goes down by each one you add. I don't have the link to that Citrix document handy, so you need to google that.
                  If you really need that many cores, you should consider a physical machine, which should make a serious bump in performance.
                  AFAIR it was the overhead of the Xen scheduler, which needs to balance the needs of your VM. The more vCPUs one VM has, the bigger the overhead. I'm sure it didn't change in more recent versions.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                  • ruskofdR Offline
                    ruskofd
                    last edited by

                    Absolutely @cg 👍

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

                      Well, it's not entirely true. You can do vCPU pinning if you want to avoid any bad placement on very large core setup, so Xen cost will be virtually non-existent. This is working well.

                      The main reason for Citrix to limit vCPU number is for support reasons: there is some odd combination possible in some case on some hardware.

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

                        @ Oli and the XCP-NG team ..

                        Will the Westmere EP (aka X5xx series etc) Xeons be supported by XCP-NG 8.0 as the XS HCL no longer lists them as a supported CPU?

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • C Offline
                          cg
                          last edited by

                          How about doing your own matrix?

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