@stormi said in XCP-ng 8.0.0 Beta now available!:

You could test with Citrix Hypervisor and then report it at https://bugs.xenserver.org
Maybe they'll want to investigate even if the hardware is not officially supported. If someone can reproduce the issue on supported hardware, that would make things easier.

Though I doubt it was woth the effort, as the support over there is well known (especially for not supported configurations etc.) I did it - for the reason of trying to improve stuff (and giving back to OSS community):
https://bugs.xenserver.org/projects/XSO/issues/XSO-955

@stormi dd stands for disk dump and does exactly that: Copy a stream of data.
Fio however can be configured for precise workloads and read/write mixes, parallel workloads etc.

So the first thing will only give you streamline benchmarks, what almost nobody cares about.
The second can simulate realworld (VM/database...) workloads, where (controller) Caches and non magnetic storage (Flash, Optane, MRAM...) makes the real difference.
Also use big amount of data, since caches can impact small ones extremely. Don't get me wrong: We need them and they can make huge differences, but as long as your benchmarks fully fit into them, it gives your nonsense/fake results. Also (consumer) SSDs start throttling after some 10 to a very few 100 GB of data written. Their caches fill up and they 'overheat'.

You can spend days on benchmarks and how to do what.

https://xen-orchestra.com/blog/xen-orchestra-5-36/

The part about ZFS:

As there are many possibilities during the creation of a ZFS storage repository, you still need to use the command line (eg. zpool create zdata /dev/sdb) to create your SR.

Check this documentation for more information about ZFS SR creation.

Once the SR is created, you will have the option to select it during the SR creation directly in Xen Orchestra.

Since it's confusing and technically wrong, it should rather be something like:

As there are many possibilities during the creation of a ZFS storage repository, you still need to use the command line (eg. zpool create zdata /dev/sdb) to create a ZFS pool before creating the corresponding SR.

Check this documentation for more information about ZFS SR creation.

Once the ZFS pool is created and mounted, you will have the option to select the mountpoint during the SR creation directly in Xen Orchestra.

...and this forum is missing a "quote" button, as formating text in codeboxes doesn't work (and tags don't survive a linebreak, you have to mark it every line again).

Regards,
Christof

Citrix also has a long history of problematic VM guest-tools. Race conditions with broken drivers, unbootable VMs, broken agents... It's a pain in the a**.
If you like your VMs: Always make a snapshot of every VM before updating the tools.

Is known why they remove the VSS-functionality? I don't get why they remove features (again).

XCP-ng already ate a bunch of time, and I'm sure it'll continue for testing etc
I'm Sysadmin with very limited coding ability - I'm definately out for that.

I guess it would need someone being good at C#.NET. Also XAPI would probably need to know about it (what may already be, as you're implementing it into XOA)...

First rule of all benchmarks: The longer and more often they run, the more precise they are.
If we talk about 1G as base, why should I switch with 10 or 100 to M? That doesn't make any sense at all.

@maxcuttins did you really measure 10 and 100 MB after I said 1 G is not enough for accurate results?

Usually you set blocksize to something usefull, like 1M and set count to e.g. 10000.
Of course you can change blocksize to test a bit, but that's usually between like 64k and maybe 4M.

How about doing your own matrix?

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.

Exactly this. Not giving - especially paying customers - any feedback/info is just the worst way to do your business.

@stormi sounds good. I was guessing that 2019 might do the job. Tempted to use 2022 on a fresh installation and not use the "old" 2019. (Thanks!)

Any info about support of Windows Server 2022. RTM (final) version has been released ~2 weeks ago.

@olivierlambert if the solution is to SSH in and fix it by hand, it's not a big deal to me. I would just see the product more 'round' if GUI would handle things like setting system IP as well as NTP servers.
(As I can't see the XOA System -> IPs menu withoud paid license: What's hidden there? Do you configure XOA IP there? How you do it without editing /etc/network/interfaces?)

@darkbeldin the problem is "already done" for XOA: It's preset by you, which means I had no chance to configure it before.
Blocked traffic should be a more common thing in 'better' company networks.

@s-pam Probably one of us has to write a quick "how to edit ntp.conf". Not super complex, just a bit of time.

And of course: I wished it would be in GUI and doesn't need extra console action.
Finally: I think all usual debian packages (e.g.) use the same ntp file, so one could easily read/write that file - no matter if it's XOA or a "custom XO".

@olivierlambert @darkbeldin That's what I tried to say: NTP ist blocked here by firewall, what I'm missing is a GUI option to set (a) manual NTP server(s) - like it's possible via xsconsole for XCP-ng.

I'm using XOA and for some days XO is telling me that it's host's time is inconsistent:

From what I can see it's roughly 1 second:

As Settings -> IPs is only available on paid XOA (or XO), I can't see if any settings for NTP servers are hidden there.
Googling just gave me back, that NTP settings have been planed to be implemented.
If not there: IMHO it's a thing that absolutely should be configurable there. Firewall here blocks all such traffic, which usually isn't a problem, as I can configure the internal NTP server.

Also: How's the tolerance between host and VM time?

@olivierlambert it turned out that the XCP-ng host was f*cked up. Whyever: About after the update of XOA and the reboot of the VM probably XCP-ng was going postal.
I noticed a bunch of weird IP addresses blocking my DHCP range and couldn't access the VM even via direct console: It didn't accept the root password.
I shut the whole host off manually and after reboot XOA and XPC-ng are working again.
Are you interested in some logfiles (dunno if there could be anything interesting)?
Probably the host got stuck somehow and that made XOA hung on trying to gather infos.

@danp It would be good if XOA could handle that more smartly. XenCenter e.g. shows which VMs are still running (and being an issue for updates). I guess XOA could extract that infos, too and by that could find out it's the only VM running.

To make it safe it could have a dialog asking if you're sure you want to reboot as XOA can't be migrated to any other server and if autostart isn't activated it could leave the server 'dead'.

@olivierlambert

@jedimarcus smart guy. Now if I only have access to the Server via XCP-ng - how do I reboot it?

I also didn't find out how to reboot the whole server from inside XOA, if the server is the only one. XOA denies restart, as there is a VM running (which is XOA itself). Is there any trick?