@acebmxer Using performance mode should migrate your VM's so all systems are equally "performant" the different modes are outlined here https://docs.xcp-ng.org/management/vm-load-balancing/
As to why your VMs not migrate, I would only be guessing - anyways my guess is that it only polls the system every so often and if your systems are performing well enough nothing gets moved...
@firefly because the underlying hardware that the VM has registered has likely changed, maybe substantially.
A sysprep has the Windows system go through and validate what it's hardware is, it removes hardware specific drivers namely, but it does other stuff too.
sysprep on windows is also sometimes required, but will require that you reactive the OS with it's product key.
Why would it take 30 minutes to boot a Windows ESXi 8.0.3 imported VM in XOA on the first boot?
Did you remove the ESXi drivers from the VM before migrating it to XCP-ng?
And to really round this out, the MTBF for any of these is in the millions of hours (1.2-3M), that's a use time of 136.968 - 342.46 years respectively.
Basically, if a drive dies, just replace it no matter what, but in the end the reliability of these drives is meant to outlast all of us.
Unless you actually need some specific function provided in some form-factor or model, don't bother.
@Greg_E The MTBF for Enterprise Hard drive, Enterprise SSD and Consume SSDs really falls into "it doesn't matter" category IMO.
https://www.backblaze.com/cloud-storage/resources/hard-drive-test-data
https://www.serverstor.com/samsung-pm9a3-vs-990-pro-enterprise-vs-consumer-ssd-showdown/
https://www.ontrack.com/en-au/blog/kingston-blog-enterprise-and-client-ssds-compared-part-2
Since most hypervisors aren't getting slammed constantly with read/writes ops even something like a "decent" consumer set of SSDs will last effectively as long as the Enterprise Hard Drives if not slightly longer.
The break down above really helps to explain it all.
Enterprise HDDs -1.2-1.5 million hours between failure
Enterprise SSDs - 2-3 million hours between failure
Consumer SSDs - 1.2 - 2 million hours between failure
Unless you expressly need some specific feature of Enterprise hardware (ECC Ram etcera) why spend more on it?
It's slower, as costly if not just more/less than the SSD comparable, adds risks during recovery time after a failure (because it's slower to rebuild an array on spinning rust).
Really the only things I would consider today would be Enterprise SSDs or Consumer SSDs.
I just setup a fresh demo install (fresh empty XCP-NG) on a laptop w/ a NAS for ISO/VM/Backup, and thought I would give XO 6 a go...and the first thing I needed was a Storage Repository...where does one add that in XO 6? in XO 5 +New > Storage.
I am not seeing anything to add one, figured I would post here, because its a new interface, I might be 100% blind to it.
It's likely not functional in XO6 atm, I'd just default to using XO5 for the infrastructure setup and then you can test the XO6 interface out as your daily driver
@cg It looks like you're using XCP-ng center (or some other solution), if you pass the USB through XO do you still have the same issue?
@Greg_E For only 6TB usable, why would you use spinning rust? Get SSD, the price delta is going to be minimal and the performance and reliability will be far higher.
@nikade said in Every virtual machine I restart doesn't boot.:
@DustinB yeah im guessing the VDI isn't attached to the VM for some reason, based on the screenshot.
Im also wondering if he ever rebooted the VM's after installing them with PXE
Right, it's a likely answer... but even then I would've expected his PXE server to just restart the installation process all over again... assuming that the disk is attached to the VM etc and that PXE boot isn't disabled automatically like it is with an ISO after first boot.
haha
A few things can be implied from his last screenshot and comments.
His boot order is set to PXE boot first, disk next.
He has no bootable disk attached to the VM.
It's possible that the disk is "detached" from the VM. IE it says disconnected or whatever under disks.
My Example
He earlier mentioned that he "created a VM with PXE as boot" but what is his PXE server doing? Why not just download the ISO or import the image directly to XCP-ng and build a VM from that as a template.
If they can get Doom to run on a female healthcare product, I think we should work to get XCP-ng to work on said same product....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1gcoyo5Ssk
haha...
@afmart_dei I'd be surprised that you can't add this host to the pool because it has a different number of PIFs... more likely than not the version mismatch is what is getting you hung up here.
Is there anyway to update everything to the same level, once that is done then you should be able to add this host to the pool.
As for Windows XP, CentOS 4 (CentOS 4 was EoL'd in 2012.... only 14 years ago) so that's likely gonna be a hard no. XP was in 2014.. likely the same boat.
The issue likely being that no one wants to program on old ass OS's to support something that the original dev no longer supports.
@acebmxer welcome to freedom.
XO 6 (Enterprise) VM Interfaces shows incorrect IP address assignment on a given VM for a multi NIC VM.
XOA Version 6.0.3
This shows correctly in XO5 Enterprise (and XOCE) without issue.
The expanded view shows both IP addresses that are assigned to different interfaces, but it doesn't delineate nor show properly which IP address is actually assigned to the VIF. See below.
On VIF1, this nic is assigned to the 172.16.1.199 address.
@Danp said in Recommended DELL Hardware ?:
@DustinB said in Recommended DELL Hardware ?:
With local storage on each hosts, you won't be able to live migrate from 1 host to the other.
That's incorrect. The migrations will take significantly longer because the VDI will be migrated along with the VM's memory, but you can live migrate VMs between hosts even if the VDI are stored on local storage.
Sorry, I'm probably using a lazy definition of live migration. I know the VM and its memory can move.
Doesn't using non-shared storage ultimately cause the VM to be started on the other host?
@Pilow said in Recommended DELL Hardware ?:
@DustinB if he has CR, he could stop it, Failover, patch primary host, and eventually failback or reverse CR job
Yeah that would work, but would force some amount of downtime. Which most people say "we can't afford 5 seconds of downtime in a year" and then in the same breath say they have almost no budget.
@giejo said in Recommended DELL Hardware ?:
@Pilow thanks, don't want XO STOR for this use case, i just need one server in a room and the other in another.
Are you planning on performing Continuous Replication job from 1 host to the other? Just trying to gauge what your plan is for the split hosts to make sure you're not missing something.
With local storage on each hosts, you won't be able to live migrate from 1 host to the other. Singular Shared Storage (like a single Synology) creates a single point of failure, that you may want to avoid (but that needs clarification).
Where as two servers, each mirrors of each other with local everything, and just replicating VM's to each other every minute or so might be sufficient for your environment.
Of course you would still need to consider how you're going to patch the pool, since you won't be able to live migrate with shared nothing..
Pretty much anything would work, it would be recommended that you use current hardware. Current being a CPU not older than 5 years.
Ideally using shared storage, either using XCP-ng's VSAN offering or something like a NAS or SAN so you can migrate your VMs as needed.
Intel or AMD doesn't effect the equation, just don't use ancient hardware. If you need an HCL, I'd recommend you take a look at what Citrix has for their HCL and go off of that list, and having installed XCP-ng.
@acebmxer said in 
️ XO 6: dedicated thread for all your feedback!:
Yes dark mode light mode work just fine. Just themes do not stay applied. I tried from different computer and different browsers same results.
Win 11 pc with chrome and brave.
Ubuntu desktop - Brave and fresh install Firefox.I even changed the domain name my XO-CE uses and same difference. It will stay working if i dont close the browser. The moment i close all tabs to the browser it defaults back to the default theme.
Open to other ideas.
I'm not surprised that it isn't "keeping" between different computers and to a lesser extent browsers.
Odds are it's a client-side cookie and nothing is saved to XO for your user account preference.
Interesting though.
