If I had my choice, Prevent Migration is more understandable.

Disable Migration, while it means the same thing, doesn't naturally come out of the English language.

@olivierlambert I was able to sort out the issue, it has to do with licensing and the fact that we aren't licensed to with "Live Migration" for this ESXi host.

Essentially this inquiry is solved.

@TechGrips While I can understand the desire to use removable USB as a Backup Repo, I would highly discourage it.

Managing and rotating USB drives is a pain, if they go to sleep, it's a pain, if they fail it's a pain, if you forget to rotate your drives, it's a pain.

I personally can understand the desire to do so, it's cheap and relatively affective if you can deal with these risks, however so is just using any NFS or SMB share and then having a replication script that could write to your USB, which you could then rotate. Separating your XCP-ng hosts, XO, and your backups is of critical importance because if you have any sort of server room environmental issues or failure, you're risking loosing everything.

XCP-ng and Xen Orchestra, while they do offer a ton of flexibility, there is obviously trades-offs to using less than ideal components, such as external USB drives as your primary backup repository.

If you really want to insist on using USB drives, you'll have to attach the drives to your host and then pass them through to your XO installation, which when you want to rotate those drives you'll have to update your Backup jobs within XO and confirm that your XO VM has the proper access to the drives. This seems like a lot of complexity for very little financial benefit.

Separately I think you're taking your own frustrations out on the community, because of a lack of understanding in the tooling that you testing in comparison to ESXi where you'd attach a USB drive directly, perform your backup, remove the disk and attach another.

I get that ESXi can make things "simple" but simple isn't always better.

HTH

The reason you wouldn't want to look at XO for this from a technical standpoint is because XO works at the hardware level of the hypervisor, dolling out resources to different VMs and creating backups.

You need to look at the content within a given VM and compare the file system difference from points A and B.

Only something that is operating within the file system would be able to readily tell you "Something has changed".

Odds are you have a user or several who are dumping files onto a share that they shouldn't be, or are replicating some cloud service to keep a copy on your server etc.

@flakpyro said in How to migrate XOA itself?:

@DustinB Are the any downsides to having two XOA instances pointing at the same pool? Since the config itself is stored at the pool level im guessing theres no downside?

IE: Priimary XOA running in core DC and secondary XOA running at your DR site. Is it just a matter of adding the pool on the secondary XOA and it downloads the existing config or did you need to do a full export / import?

If you import your configuration, each XO instance will think they should be running the backups as far as I've noticed. If I have two instances running with the same configuration, I simply disable the backup jobs on one of them.

The config file is just an XML that contains your existing instance. You can import it to any new XO instance and have the same exact configuration.

@yzgulec there really isn't any hard-fast rules to aligning CPU to vCPU. A Guest is going to need cores to operate no matter what.

If you're trying to min-max your CPU utilization for a given system, you might want to target the guest to use between 70-80% of it's vCPU all of the time.

This is all a part of system tuning and is always a shifting target, as CPU is shared among all VMs and DOM0.

As you increase the number of guests on a host, the CPU consumption will be increased, which means you may need to scale back on the vCPU a given VM has.

@stormi said in XSA-468: multiple Windows PV driver vulnerabilities - update now!:

Do others share this feeling and have this question after re-reading the whole announcement?

No it's pretty clear, update the drivers on everything as all versions are susceptible.

@olivierlambert I agree wholeheartedly with you on that. Keeping the system stock is best for support.

Separately, is there any planned work on officially integrating support for Uninterruptable Power Supplies and XCP-ng 8.3?

A question

• Have you clicked into the console screen before hitting F12?

You can disable all of the boot devices in the Advanced section of the VM, try disabling the HDD

Disable the Boot options if your system is making it past POST to quickly so you can get into the Guests BIOS.

@jasonnix said in A question for the creators of XO:

Hi @olivierlambert,
No, I'm not a bot. I asked it because I need your experiences. I want to make a panel for Xen.

So you know how to program with PHP and Ruby and not with Javascript, so the question is really "Why can't this be rewritten so I can help?"

@idar21 said in Xen Orchestra 5.110 V2V not working:

unique configurations slip through the cracks,

In all fairness, edge cases are never tested for until you're building solutions for those edge cases.... It is a bit rough to simply throw the entire thing away because you're on an edge case and a tool built for the masses doesn't work on that edge case...

If you really require uptime of XOA, you could use a public cloud like AWS, setup an EKS cluster across 3 AZ's each having a Site to Site VPN and an EC2 instance which provides a connection so you can access the hosts at a given site.

It's an expensive approach, but the only way I can think of that would ensure XOA was running at all times in the event of an individual outage.

@AtaxyaNetwork said in Unbootable VHD backups:

@Schmidty86 Try to detach the disk and reattach, it should be xvda in order to be bootable

That's what I was thinking as well, but obviously something is off with this VM.

@Schmidty86 is the old host still online? If so you might be able to perform a Live Migration or a replication job to copy it from the old host to the new.

@Schmidty86 That disk appears to be a secondary disk, is this just a "data volume" and not a boot volume (looking at XO where it shows xvdb)?

Hrm as to the fact that it still shows it as a misc disk.... I'm at a loss.

said in Unbootable VHD backups:

@Schmidty86 I dont see your disk at all listed, only PXE (network booting) and then the MISC device (which is the questionable item).

The internal Shell isn't relevant to this conversation.

As a side thought, re-enable the DISK under advanced and then reboot into BIOS and see if the disk is listed.

@Schmidty86 I dont see your disk at all listed, only PXE (network booting) and then the MISC device (which is the questionable item).

The internal Shell isn't relevant to this conversation.

@Schmidty86 Try disabling the boot devices under advanced

https://xcp-ng.org/forum/topic/8357/i-cannot-enter-the-vm-boot-menu/2

then you'll have more time to see what the options are to get into BIOS.

It might even be as simple as tapping the Shift Key while the VM starts.... I don't have to do it often enough to commit to memory, but you can definitely get into BIOS on a VM that "isn't posting". You've technically made it past post, and are failing due to a missing boot device.

@Schmidty86 You might need to go into BIOS and check to see if this now missing device is still listed, and disable it if it is.

@Schmidty86 did this VM previously have a USB device that was passed through on your prior host?

@Schmidty86 The VM template that you created to attach these VHD to, is it configured for BIOS or UEFI?