XCP-ng

    • Register
    • Login
    • Search
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups

    XCP-ng 8.3 public alpha πŸš€

    News
    36
    221
    12552
    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.
    • olivierlambert
      olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder🦸 CEO πŸ§‘β€πŸ’Ό last edited by

      But that's weird that Adblockers will block our domain, which is harmless and without any spam πŸ€” How could we explain it's "flagged"?

      C 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • C
        cocoon XCP-ng Center Team 🏚️ @olivierlambert last edited by

        @olivierlambert
        I can't explain it, just had seen the error πŸ€”
        and here it seems to have happened, too:
        https://stackoverflow.com/a/62646075/19868457

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • olivierlambert
          olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder🦸 CEO πŸ§‘β€πŸ’Ό last edited by

          Might worth a contact to the plugin authors to put it in a authorized list (or avoid to put it in a block list)

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • apz
            apz last edited by

            Is this release technically the point where XCP-ng starts to veer off more from the XS source as to my understanding they're already keeping some parts out of public repos nowdays?

            It'd be interesting to see newer Xen for example in the future and the SMAPIv3!

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • olivierlambert
              olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder🦸 CEO πŸ§‘β€πŸ’Ό last edited by

              We can't answer since it's not only on us. But on our side, we have more knowledge and more capabilities than previously to make our own moves. However, we want to keep our "upstream first" philosophy and convince XS to stay close to us. That's why we spend some times to get decent pull requests and some patience to get them merged πŸ™‚

              We truly hope to share a common future where we wouldn't have to work twice on the same problems, but instead share our man power to be more efficient together. The rest is on XS team πŸ™‚

              Also, as said before, in increasing order of complexity:

              1. Get a more recent Xen version
              2. Get a more recent Linux kernel version
              3. Get a more recent platform (beyond CentOS 7)
              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
              • Anonabhar
                Anonabhar last edited by

                Hi Everyone,

                I was wondering if this is a bug or if it is something specific to my setup. But.. I just noticed that a 'rescan' seems to be happening on my lab server every 30 seconds..

                I noticed this because I was making a new template for XOCE and was deleting snapshots (viewing the /var/log/SMlog to wait until the coalescing was complete) and noticed that this was happening.

                I will include the log file for viewing.. The log file is trimmed from 0730 -> present so it would fit in the posting limits.. But this was happening from the begging of the rotated logfile..

                smlog.txt

                ~Peg

                ronan-a 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • olivierlambert
                  olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder🦸 CEO πŸ§‘β€πŸ’Ό last edited by

                  This is normal πŸ™‚ Adding @ronan-a in the loop to get a confirmation that SMAPIv1 is scanning every 30 secs.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • ronan-a
                    ronan-a Vates πŸͺ XCP-ng Team πŸš€ @Anonabhar last edited by

                    @Anonabhar Could you upload the other logs (xensource.log, daemon.log, etc)? There is no valid reason to have a call to cleanup.py (not a SR scan) every 30s if there is nothing to coalesce. πŸ™‚

                    Anonabhar 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • Anonabhar
                      Anonabhar @ronan-a last edited by

                      @ronan-a Sure.. I would be happy to... I just had to append a .txt to the end of the file in order to upload it.. Please remove .txt and decompress

                      logs2.tar.gz.txt

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • F
                        Fungusware last edited by

                        So I read about the 'VM snapshot with disk exclusion' feature.

                        Is this supported at the XAPI level now? If so, how would one go about using it?

                        Regards

                        BenjiReis olivierlambert 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • BenjiReis
                          BenjiReis Vates πŸͺ XCP-ng Team πŸš€ @Fungusware last edited by

                          @Fungusware Hi!

                          Yes this feature is supported at XAPI level, the VM.snapshot method now has a ignore_vdis field which is a list of VDI ref to not include in the snapshot.
                          This also available through xe:

                          xe vm-snapshot vm=... ignore-vdi-uuids=uuid1,uuid2...
                          

                          Regards

                          F 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                          • olivierlambert
                            olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder🦸 CEO πŸ§‘β€πŸ’Ό @Fungusware last edited by

                            @Fungusware Yes, @BenjiReis spent some time to make that contribution to XAPI upstream, see https://github.com/xapi-project/xen-api/pull/4563

                            benjamreis created this issue in xapi-project/xen-api

                            closed Add `ignore_vdis` to `VM.snapshot` method #4563

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • olivierlambert
                              olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder🦸 CEO πŸ§‘β€πŸ’Ό last edited by olivierlambert

                              Note: this is already implemented in Xen Orchestra since a while πŸ™‚ (by default we try to ignore the [NOBAK] disk if XAPI is able to do it, which is now the case for 8.3)

                              F 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                              • F
                                Fungusware @BenjiReis last edited by

                                @BenjiReis Thanks for the info.

                                I'll see if I can support into the SDK also, at least for .NET anyway.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • H
                                  hoerup last edited by

                                  What is current status? What is the rough expectation of next alpha/beta release

                                  stormi 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • olivierlambert
                                    olivierlambert Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder🦸 CEO πŸ§‘β€πŸ’Ό last edited by

                                    What kind of status are you expecting?

                                    Anonabhar 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • F
                                      Fungusware @olivierlambert last edited by

                                      @olivierlambert Yes, I had been doing this also for quite some time. It was certainly one of the most requested features. It also felt a bit 'brute force' to me so would be nice to use it built in.

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • Anonabhar
                                        Anonabhar @olivierlambert last edited by

                                        @olivierlambert Well.. I have been doing the occasional "yum update" with no new problems. Everything is working great, but I still have that re-scanning of the FS every 30 seconds.. Not impacting anything but just a little weird...

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • stormi
                                          stormi Vates πŸͺ XCP-ng Team πŸš€ @hoerup last edited by stormi

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

                                          What is current status? What is the rough expectation of next alpha/beta release

                                          The next planned release should be the first beta. There's no precise ETA yet, but first quarter of 2023 is a likely window.

                                          Applying updates regularly on top of the alpha will also give you the same end-result.

                                          There are a lot of updated packages that are being prepared. They're currently in the xcp-ng-testing yum repository, because we haven't had time to test them all in our internal CI. All I could assess is that they install well (yum update --enablerepo=xcp-ng-testing) and that the server I installed them to rebooted without any visible issue. Once tested, early January, they'll be moved to the xcp-ng-base repository and offered as updates to anyone running yum update on their 8.3. If you want to give it a go ahead of time, you can install them and see if everything works well or not, so that we can quickly work on any issues early January.

                                          Recent work on 8.3 touched:

                                          • the installer (soft RAID support improvements, IPv6 support, contribution of various small improvements to upstream repositories...)
                                          • automated installation ISO generation
                                          • adding memtest86+ to the installer, both in BIOS and UEFI modes
                                          • upgrading all packages to the same level as Xenserver 8 Stream's (that's the new name for Citrix Hypervisor 8 Cloud) preview update channels - we had 4 months of changes to catch up with.
                                          • redirecting http://ip_or_name_of_xcpng_server/ to https://ip_or_name_of_xcpng_server/
                                          • ongoing work with XenServer on the python2 to python3 transition
                                          • work on UEFI certificate handling, to reach a stage where it answers both XenServer's and our needs
                                          • and more.
                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 3
                                          • jhansen
                                            jhansen last edited by

                                            Hello,
                                            I have some trouble with update from 8.2 to 8.3

                                            I boot the installation from USB with Image xcp-ng-8.3.0-alpha2.
                                            Everything works until I get to the installation. The backup of the old version is still made, then this error message appears:
                                            Old partition layout is unsupported, run prepare_host_upgrade and try again. Reboot
                                            The 8.2 installation is a 3 month old fresh installation, I doubt there is an old partition type in this 8.2 version.
                                            I removed all disks except the boot disk which only contains the XCP-NG system. Still the same error.
                                            The partition structure of the disk is as follows:

                                            Model: ATA TS512GSSD720 (scsi)
                                            Disk /dev/sda: 512GB
                                            Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
                                            Partition Table: gpt
                                            Disk Flags: pmbr_boot

                                            Number Start End Size File system Name Flags
                                            4 1049kB 538MB 537MB bios_grub, legacy_boot
                                            1 538MB 4295MB 3757MB ext3
                                            2 4296MB 8590MB 4294MB ext3
                                            3 8591MB 512GB 504GB lvm

                                            Does anyone have an idea what's going wrong.

                                            I don't want to do a fresh installation because then I have to restore a lot of data. It's my test machine and I have a backup, but with 29 TB it takes days to restore and without data there is little point in testing 8.3.

                                            regards Joerg

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