XCP-ng

    • Register
    • Login
    • Search
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    1. Home
    2. john.c
    J
    • Profile
    • Following 0
    • Followers 0
    • Topics 2
    • Posts 8
    • Best 1
    • Controversial 0
    • Groups 0

    john.c

    @john.c

    3
    Reputation
    13
    Profile views
    8
    Posts
    0
    Followers
    0
    Following
    Joined Last Online

    john.c Unfollow Follow

    Best posts made by john.c

    • RE: vGPU - which graphics card supported?

      @gustavoninetyone @ChuckNorrison @olivierlambert A graphics card suitable for vGPU is AMD Radeon Pro V340 this card supports both SR-IOV and also AMD MxGPU Technologies. These have extremely high performance, with suitability for virtualisation.

      Other cards with the capabilities from AMD are designed for workstations primarily. The workstations based Radeon Pro W6000 Series has these technologies. It would enable the capability for vGPU as it can be used for VDI.

      Edit: If you can get a hold of a card from NVIDIA or a card using a chip from this list (https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/data-center/graphics-cards-for-virtualization/) then you can also use it as a vGPU.

      posted in Development
      J
      john.c

    Latest posts made by john.c

    • RE: Power on Settings configuration

      @olivierlambert A hypothetical use case for your large deployment customers. As well some parts would be useful for XO Lite users on a pool (depending on size).

      There's remote servers but currently they aren't always fully powered on. Just powered up enough for iLO or iDRAC etc to work. Opening the ports for them directly to the Internet is a security risk though.

      So being able configure them via XO (with XO Proxy) and/or XO Lite would really help. As the transmissions when done in an authenticated format in a similar fashion to how backups are handled on remote geographic locations.

      The XO and/or XO Proxy would translate the calls for going over HTTPS. Either would execute the remote power calls depending on whether its connected to XO Proxy or XOA. Though the APIs or WOLs wouldn't be Internet accessible only with in the appropriate appliances location (on its network).

      The ability to remotely power on servers would be helpful, load balancing features as servers could also potentially shutdown and powered off when not needed. Less electricity usage especially when combined with BIOS or UEFI energy efficiency settings to further reduce power wastage.

      posted in Xen Orchestra
      J
      john.c
    • Power on Settings configuration

      Hi,

      In the XCP-ng admin (Xen Centre) there's the options to set power on settings for hosts and/or pools. Specifically iLO, iDRAC and/or generic WOL to cause a wake on LAN.

      Is it possible to enable such a possibility to configure, if not already present in Xen Orchestra and/or XO: Lite?

      Also this could be an XO Proxy feature by having a HTTPS translation for transmission outside of network.
      The request gets converted into a XO proxy and XO compatible format. This request then gets executed by XO proxy and/or the host with XO proxy VM or software installed.

      The ports for WOL would remain closed to the internet, so not a security risk (vulnerability). However it would be handled through the passing of a text based request structured data in the XO and XO proxy format. Basically in a similar fashion to how XO proxy handles backups and other requests.

      posted in Xen Orchestra xenorchestra xcp-ng xcp-ng center
      J
      john.c
    • RE: Xen Orchestra Community Edition - Registration

      @gsrfan01 Another option from this would be a low per month option, or a perpetual option.

      Also when converted into £ the $50 United States Dollars, would be around £41 per year. Alternatively the $150 dollars per year would be around £123.

      This is based on exchanges rates for 30th June 2022 at 15:25.

      posted in Xen Orchestra
      J
      john.c
    • RE: vGPU - which graphics card supported?

      @gustavoninetyone @ChuckNorrison @olivierlambert A graphics card suitable for vGPU is AMD Radeon Pro V340 this card supports both SR-IOV and also AMD MxGPU Technologies. These have extremely high performance, with suitability for virtualisation.

      Other cards with the capabilities from AMD are designed for workstations primarily. The workstations based Radeon Pro W6000 Series has these technologies. It would enable the capability for vGPU as it can be used for VDI.

      Edit: If you can get a hold of a card from NVIDIA or a card using a chip from this list (https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/data-center/graphics-cards-for-virtualization/) then you can also use it as a vGPU.

      posted in Development
      J
      john.c
    • RE: vGPU - which graphics card supported?

      @gustavoninetyone It would also be very slow (or very, very slow) over virtualisation instances, even if added. As it utilises the AGP interface for connection, this interface is very slow. Especially when compared to PCIe graphics cards especially those from the PCIe versions 3.0 and above.

      So there would likely be possibly dropped frames and/or other issues both graphical and technical.

      It would also limit what can be done in virtual machines, on hosts with it. Though it would have its uses, just bear in mind the performance cost.

      If your going to go low cost for VDI then the use of Radeon Pro cards can get hardware video acceleration. Additionally there's open source drivers, for this acceleration so missing parts can be developed by community and driver can be forked if necessary. This would occur through the pass through. Though Radeon Pros are for workstations, I don't know how well the hardware acceleration works on the equivalent data centre graphics cards.

      posted in Development
      J
      john.c
    • RE: Xen Orchestra Community Edition - Registration

      @olivierlambert Registration to remove banner is an idea, but some kind of notification on the registered user profile would be helpful. Viewable from their Xen Orchestra account, along with details of instance registered.

      Basically have it say on the Xen Orchestra user account profile page, where the registrations are displayed.

      A table or list with the following:-

      • IP Address/FQDN (or some kind of identifier)

      • Xen Orchestra Edition Registered

      • Status of support for instance

      • Status of updates of xen orchestra for instance

      This display panel of registered instances of Xen Orchestra, is for all editions of the product to aid management for all users.

      posted in Xen Orchestra
      J
      john.c
    • RE: Xen Orchestra Community Edition - Registration

      @olivierlambert You may not do that, however what about the notification that appears when that hasn't happened. The icon for this appears even if you can't do that.

      posted in Xen Orchestra
      J
      john.c
    • Xen Orchestra Community Edition - Registration

      Even though no support can officially be provided for CE, I did a build to help the development for that part of the user base.

      I discovered a cosmetic and/or functional discrepancy, the xen orchestra complains that the software isn't registered. However you can't actually do this, due to the form fields not working.

      Thus the notification warning icon, won't ever go away, will become very annoying for people using that edition. May I recommend or suggest that this notification, doesn't appear if the community edition can't be registered in order to get support and appliance updates officially. Still show the message in that area, about the community edition vs appliance edition.

      posted in Xen Orchestra xenorchestra
      J
      john.c