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

    XCP-ng 8.3 public alpha πŸš€

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved News
    264 Posts 43 Posters 176.6k Views 39 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.
    • olivierlambertO Offline
      olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder CEO
      last edited by olivierlambert

      You should really start to work on 8.2 LTS first and see what you really need in real life. If it's not enterprise production, then go for 8.3.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
      • ajpri1998A Offline
        ajpri1998
        last edited by

        @Louis
        XCP-ng gets security updates about monthly. @Andrew also has custom isos that already have the 2.5GBe drivers included.

        XCP-ng/XO are well maintained projects.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • R Offline
          rRobbie
          last edited by

          Summary: upgrade from 8.3alpha to 8.3alpha2 broke my installation.

          Yesterday I tried to upgrade my Intel NUC11 from the original 8.3alpha (very stable so far) to the 8.3alpha2.

          The upgrade process concluded without errors, however upon restart while the host was accessible via SSH, all the rest disappeared (no XOALite, no VM and obviously no XOA).

          I tried to list the vm with "xe vm-list" resulting in "Error: Connection refused (calling connect)". Then I tried to restart with "xe-toolstack-restart" but without success.

          Right now using the installer I reverted to previous installation... indeed a useful function πŸ™‚

          Your insights is welcome, I can make any test you might be interested in.

          Thanks

          olivierlambertO 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • R Offline
            RaHu @olivierlambert
            last edited by

            @olivierlambert

            Hi There,
            Just to mention, my personal hopes are for the future, that whatever kernel will be used, RPM packages will still be supported to install.

            Usecase:
            I am using Dell / Quest DR-Appliances for Backups. They've implemented RapidCIFS and RapidNFS in order to do kind of CBT enhancement on these protocols. So when backing up - only delta is copied.

            However, as usual, they provide this driver officially only for Windows and RHEL. Therefore I could install the RPM on the XCP-Hosts, and benefit from this. It's running amazingliy smooth.

            I would assume that there might be more of such use cases, and keeping support for RHEL packages could be wise in oder to keep a foot into the "enterprise door".

            Thanks, for your work!

            Regards,
            RaHu

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

              Thanks for your feedback @RaHu

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • olivierlambertO Offline
                olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder CEO @rRobbie
                last edited by

                @rRobbie I'm not sure it was even guarantee in the first place. Asking @stormi

                R 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • R Offline
                  rRobbie @olivierlambert
                  last edited by rRobbie

                  @olivierlambert

                  Thank you, appreciated 😊

                  I followed - maybe bluntly - this reassuring sentence but I guess it meant from 8.2!

                  Screenshot from 2023-02-28 09-48-32.png

                  https://xcp-ng.org/blog/2022/11/18/xcp-ng-8-3-alpha/

                  stormiS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • stormiS Offline
                    stormi Vates πŸͺ XCP-ng Team @rRobbie
                    last edited by

                    @rRobbie Yes, it meant from 8.2 πŸ™‚

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • stormiS Offline
                      stormi Vates πŸͺ XCP-ng Team @gskger
                      last edited by stormi

                      @gskger Thanks! For shorter logs, could you run ./xtf-runner -aqq --host rather than ./xtf-runner -aq --host in the future? We don't need the full list of successful tests. Only skipped and failed ones.

                      gskgerG 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • gskgerG Offline
                        gskger Top contributor @stormi
                        last edited by

                        @stormi Of course! Picked up that habit from other posts. Should I correct my post to improve readability?

                        stormiS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • stormiS Offline
                          stormi Vates πŸͺ XCP-ng Team @gskger
                          last edited by

                          @gskger No, only future ones πŸ™‚

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                          • theAeonT Offline
                            theAeon
                            last edited by theAeon

                            root@lenovo150
                            --------------
                            OS: XCP-ng release 8.2.1 (xenenterprise) x86_64
                            Host: ThinkServer TS150 70LUS00C00
                            Kernel: 4.19.0+1
                            Uptime: 7 mins
                            Packages: 551 (rpm)
                            Shell: bash 4.2.46
                            Terminal: /dev/pts/13
                            CPU: Intel Xeon E3-1275 v5 (8) @ 3.600GHz
                            GPU: Intel HD Graphics P530
                            Memory: 560MiB / 2498MiB
                            

                            note: only on 8.2.1 because I don't feel like even potentially breaking anything right now out of sheer laziness but its been rock solid so far

                            [19:51 lenovo150 xtf]# ./xtf-runner selftest -q --host
                            Combined test results:
                            test-hvm32-selftest                      SUCCESS
                            test-hvm32pae-selftest                   SUCCESS
                            test-hvm32pse-selftest                   SUCCESS
                            test-hvm64-selftest                      SUCCESS
                            test-pv64-selftest                       SUCCESS
                            

                            and

                            [19:52 lenovo150 xtf]# ./xtf-runner -aqq --host
                            Combined test results:
                            test-hvm32-umip                          SKIP
                            test-hvm64-umip                          SKIP
                            test-pv64-xsa-167                        SKIP
                            test-pv64-xsa-182                        SKIP
                            

                            and of course

                            [20:00 lenovo150 ~]# /usr/libexec/xen/bin/test-cpu-policy
                            CPU Policy unit tests
                            Testing CPU vendor identification:
                            Testing CPUID serialise success:
                            Testing CPUID deserialise failure:
                            Testing CPUID out-of-range clearing:
                            Testing MSR serialise success:
                            Testing MSR deserialise failure:
                            Testing policy compatibility success:
                            Testing policy compatibility failure:
                            
                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                            • ajpri1998A Offline
                              ajpri1998
                              last edited by

                              I have a minor feature request…
                              Can we get the xen-cmdline (/opt/xensource/libexec/xen-cmdline) added to the default PATH? I don’t use it too often but having it would save me a google remembering? I’ve also added to my bashrc with the name xcl.

                              stormiS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • gskgerG Offline
                                gskger Top contributor @stormi
                                last edited by

                                @stormi
                                Probably more a fun test than a real world test. I installed XCP-ng 8.3 alpha2 run on a

                                HP T620 PLUS Thin Client
                                AMD GX-420CA @ 2GHz low power APU SoC (Jaguar)
                                16 GB RAM

                                According to Art of Server on Youtube, this Thin Client supports up to 32GB RAM. It idles around 14-17W with XCP-ng and one Debian VM running. It also features a low profile PCI-e slot that I use with a Intel Pro / 1000 PT quad port LP card.

                                [21:58 xcp83 xtf]# ./xtf-runner selftest -q --host
                                Combined test results:
                                test-hvm32-selftest                      SUCCESS
                                test-hvm32pae-selftest                   SUCCESS
                                test-hvm32pse-selftest                   SUCCESS
                                test-hvm64-selftest                      SUCCESS
                                test-pv64-selftest                       SUCCESS
                                
                                
                                [21:58 xcp83 xtf]# ./xtf-runner -aqq --host
                                Combined test results:
                                test-pv64-cpuid-faulting                 SKIP
                                test-pv64-pv-fsgsbase                    SKIP
                                test-hvm32-umip                          SKIP
                                test-hvm64-umip                          SKIP
                                test-pv64-xsa-167                        SKIP
                                test-pv64-xsa-182                        SKIP
                                [21:59 xcp83 xtf]# echo $?
                                3
                                
                                
                                [21:59 xcp83 xtf]# /usr/libexec/xen/bin/test-cpu-policy
                                CPU Policy unit tests
                                Testing CPU vendor identification:
                                Testing CPUID serialise success:
                                Testing CPUID deserialise failure:
                                Testing CPUID out-of-range clearing:
                                Testing MSR serialise success:
                                Testing MSR deserialise failure:
                                Testing policy compatibility success:
                                Testing policy compatibility failure:
                                Done: all ok
                                [22:00 xcp83 xtf]# echo $?
                                0
                                
                                
                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                                • olivierlambertO Offline
                                  olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder CEO
                                  last edited by

                                  Haha that's an interesting little machine, indeed πŸ˜„

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • jhansenJ Offline
                                    jhansen
                                    last edited by

                                    Hello, here my test of version 8.3 in the last weeks:

                                    I tried to put everything I could think of in or on the machine. Different hardware and different versions of Windows and Linux, backup of XO, with and without Xen tools, etc.
                                    So far no crashes or major problems, even if I drove the machine to the limits of its resilience, everything runs smoothly and for days, for this a thumbs up. πŸ‘

                                    Hardware:
                                    Dell Poweredge 730, CPU 2x E5-2698 V4, 512GB RAM
                                    2 x Intel I350 1Gb adapters
                                    2 x Intel X540-AT2 10Gb adapters
                                    1 x Dell H730P mono Raid Controller (5 x 8TB Disk in Raid5)
                                    2 x SSD in Raid 1 as Boot Drive
                                    1 x PCie NVMe Adapter (4 x 2TB NVMe Disk in Softraid 5)
                                    ( Yummi, over 1 GByte/sec write speed in a VM with 2 TB of Data) 😳
                                    1x Nvidia K80 GPU card

                                    This is without a doubt the biggest test machine I've ever had. 😊

                                    I have tested so far:
                                    All standard functions (Copy, Move, Migrate, Snapshot etc.)
                                    Use of GPU (Windows VM)
                                    PCI passthrough (Windows, Linux - NetCard, USB, PCI card)
                                    SR-IOV (see comments below)
                                    Backup with XO
                                    Heavy network load (copy 26TB of data via 10 GB netcard)
                                    Heavy CPU and GPU load (8 VM with CPU at maximum for hours)
                                    Fast copying of large data between the different SRs in the system.

                                    With the exception of the SR-IOV, no problems were encountered and the performance was excellent in all respects.πŸ‘

                                    What made me very happy was the installation of Xen-Tools under Windows 2022. I have often had the experience that after a Windows update the server no longer wanted to start due to a driver update. The problem seems to have disappeared completely, all drivers were installed automatically when the server was installed and have so far survived all updates from Microsoft without any problems. I only had to manually add the management agent.

                                    SR IOV:
                                    The two Intel I350 1Gb adapters no longer show up as SR-IOV adapters and have lost that functionality. They still worked under 8.2.
                                    The Intel X540-AT2 adapters have the SR-IOV function. But when I use it, the adapter port shuts down after a short time. The Xen server still shows the card as connectet, but the network function is gone. The coupled switch shows the port as deactivated. In between, the network function is there again for a short time and the switch also shows this. The second 10 GB port runs error-free all the time. If I switch off the SR-IOV of the port, it works without any problems. Both as a normal Xen-Nic and in PCI passthrough. I copied TByte over the port, no errors.
                                    It must be somehow due to the SR-IOV that apparently no longer works under 8.3.
                                    I would be interested to know if others have experienced something similar or if everything works there.

                                    I would like to test the "VM snapshot with disk exclusion" but somehow I can't do it. Both the snapshot and the XO always back up the entire VM with all disks. I'm sure it's error 50 (50cm in front of the keyboard) πŸ˜₯ . Is there a detailed description of how to set it up somewhere?

                                    Unfortunately I haven't been able to test any pool functions yet, so I have to set up a second machine for that. I can't get a second machine that size. I will probably have to build 2 smaller systems with shared storage and test them there.

                                    If anyone thinks of anything else I could test, let me know

                                    So far everything looks very good, you did a great job.

                                    Greetings Joerg

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                                    • olivierlambertO Offline
                                      olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder CEO
                                      last edited by

                                      Thanks @jhansen for all your test work done on this alpha release!

                                      1. SR IOV: that's interesting, we will probably get that feedback to XS team too, I wonder why it's broken πŸ€”
                                      2. VM snap disk exclusion: that should be straight forward, but I'll try to see if I can reproduce it myself.

                                      Thanks again!

                                      jhansenJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • jhansenJ Offline
                                        jhansen @olivierlambert
                                        last edited by

                                        @olivierlambert said in XCP-ng 8.3 public alpha πŸš€:

                                        snap disk exclusion

                                        Thank you too.
                                        I use the SR-IOV under 8.2 and it work there on the same netcard. I don't think these are suddenly broken.

                                        A description for the snap disk exclusion would be great, I hate error 50 😧

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

                                          In theory [NOBAK] in the disk name should be enough but I didn't test it myself

                                          jhansenJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • jhansenJ Offline
                                            jhansen @olivierlambert
                                            last edited by

                                            @olivierlambert
                                            Hmmm. Tried rename the Disk "SRV-File-Debian-10.10" in "[NOBAK] SRV-File-Debian-10.10"
                                            It does not work!

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