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

    First SMAPIv3 driver is available in preview

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Development
    64 Posts 18 Posters 16.3k Views 23 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

      Here we go!

      https://xcp-ng.org/blog/2024/04/19/first-smapiv3-driver-is-available-in-preview/

      Your feedback in this thread will be helpful!

      gskgerG 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 5
      • Marc.pezinM Marc.pezin referenced this topic on
      • olivierlambertO olivierlambert referenced this topic on
      • J Offline
        jmannik
        last edited by

        So this can't be used for NFS SR's yet then?

        DanpD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • DanpD Offline
          Danp Pro Support Team @jmannik
          last edited by

          @jmannik It's only meant for testing on local storage at this time.

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

            Yep, the first driver is local only. More drivers will come after this first one.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
            • nikadeN Offline
              nikade Top contributor
              last edited by

              Worked just fine setting it up, but I noticed that there are no stats visible in XO:

              e07fc882-2ea9-4421-ad88-66550896e342-bild.png

              Is this expected behaviour?

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

                That's normal, there's no stat gathering with SMAPIv3. I'll update the blog post accordingly, I forgot about it πŸ™‚

                nikadeN 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • nikadeN Offline
                  nikade Top contributor @olivierlambert
                  last edited by

                  @olivierlambert said in First SMAPIv3 driver is available in preview:

                  That's normal, there's no stat gathering with SMAPIv3. I'll update the blog post accordingly, I forgot about it πŸ™‚

                  Oh, just now or will there never be stats?
                  Its a pretty important feature in an enterprise setup πŸ™‚

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

                    Obviously just now πŸ˜‰ Observability is crucial πŸ™‚

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

                      @olivierlambert Easy to install and setup on a dedicated host. Did some basic testing with VM creation, snapshots, (re-) import-/exporting, copying, removing and all worked.

                      The blog post on the SMAPIv3 preview states that it is not yet possible to use this SR type for live storage motion. But it seems that no storage migration is possible at this point (neither live, warm nor cold migration from or to the SMAPIv3 volume). Copying a VM from the SMAPIv3 to a local SMAPIv1 SR works and vice versa.

                      Looking forward to more capabilities of the SMAPIv3 implementation. Keep up the great work πŸ’ͺ !

                      Eidt: typos and some clarifications

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

                        I will add a precision because it's indeed normal there's no storage motion at all for now πŸ™‚ (but in the "green" callout, we explain copy is a first migration path)

                        edit: now the sentence is more clear with "you won't be able to use this SR type for live or offline storage motion".

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

                          From the blog post

                          Size: grow a VDI in size. It's fully thin provisioned!

                          Does this mean we finally have live/hot disk expansion ?

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

                            Not right now, but likely in the future, yes πŸ™‚

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

                              @olivierlambert said in First SMAPIv3 driver is available in preview:

                              right now, but likely in the future,

                              Are we going to eventually be able to have larger than 2TB volumes on EXT4 partitions? I'm not really setup to do ZFS and not really sure I want the headache that come along with it. My PERC controllers have always been super reliable so Ext4 is fin with me as for FS trype.

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

                                We will likely not use VHD anymore in SMAPIv3 (there's no point), so yes, if/when we decide to make an ext4 driver, it will store other files format (like maybe qcow2)

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                • Tristis OrisT Offline
                                  Tristis Oris Top contributor
                                  last edited by

                                  created, clone some VMs into, run, looks fine.
                                  Hard to say anything about perfomance, etc. Need a some real production (impossible), or compare benchmarks (fio for example, but ZFS should be slower of basic lvm anyway, so what result is good?). Is it anything we need to test?

                                  provisioning unknown)
                                  1c32b64c-b04f-46b2-9c34-7418fc176b55-ΠΈΠ·ΠΎΠ±Ρ€Π°ΠΆΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅.png

                                  same for VM, probably > no stat gathering with SMAPIv3.
                                  81d4fac1-5a16-4639-9633-65919517b19f-ΠΈΠ·ΠΎΠ±Ρ€Π°ΠΆΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅.png

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • nikadeN Offline
                                    nikade Top contributor
                                    last edited by

                                    Yeah its not going to display any stats for now, so you'll have to look at the numbers inside the VM.

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

                                      The goal is to test the fact that it runs OK for a bit, so we are sure to not miss anything. Fio is your friend to benchmark in a VM, remember that it's still blktap behind, so if you want better performance numbers, do it with multiple VDIs at once.

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

                                        I tested SMAPIv1 on XCP 8.2.1 against SMAPIv3 on XCP 8.3b2 using the same host (a HP ProDesk 400 G6 with a i5-10500T CPU, 32GB RAM). A 1 TB Samsung 860 EVO SSD drive was used as the test SR, while XCP was booted from a 512 M.2 KIOXA NVMe drive. Fio (fio-3.37) was compiled from source on an up-to-date Debian 12 VM (2 vCPU, 4 GiB RAM, 32GiB drive) which was copied twice so that three identical VM could run fio in parallel.

                                        After an initial fio run to create the files, a script run three sequential write and read tests (e.g. fio --name=fio --ioengine=libaio --randrepeat=1 --direct=1 --fallocate=none --ramp_time=10 --size=4G --iodepth=64 --loops=50 --group_reporting --numjobs=1 --rw=write --bs=1M). The script first ran on one VM, followed by a run on three VMs in parallel. IOPs and bandwidths were averaged.

                                        d4beab9b-1328-4d67-8794-49b45093572b-grafik.png

                                        v1-1VM are the results for one VM on a SMAPIv1 SR (XCP 8.2.1) while v3-3VM are the results for three VMs in parallel an a SMAPIv3 SR (XCP 8.3b2).

                                        While I'm not sure if this approach is really valid (e.g. the average load of the host went through the roof when three VMs performed fio in parallel), it does suggest that the bandwidth of SMAPIv3 is not yet en-par to that of SMAPIv1. But I could be wrong and this is an early previews of SMAPIv3. Looking forward to more performance results on SMAPIv3.

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

                                          Hi,

                                          I'm not sure to understand. What kind of SMAPIv1 SR did you try to compare with ZFS on v3?

                                          R 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • R Offline
                                            rfx77 @olivierlambert
                                            last edited by

                                            @olivierlambert

                                            Can you provide a link to the github repo where we can find the source-code of this smapiv3 driver?

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