@Pilow perfect!

I can confirm that when using Citrix/Xenserver guest utilities version 8.4 (https://github.com/xenserver/xe-guest-utilities/releases/tag/v8.4.0) memory ballooning / DMC is working fine. After live migration the RAM of the linux guest is expanded to dynamic_max again. So this issue was in fact caused by Rust based xen-guest-agent. For now I'll keep using Citrix/Xenserver guest utilities on my Linux guests until the feature is implemented in Vates rust-based guest utilities. Best regards

@florent I think you meant it was locking the xoa via .tar.gz but not via .zip which seemed to be the case Yeah I just decompressed the restored .zip and checked number of files and size via ncdu, result: "Total disk usage: 194,5 MiB Apparent size: 193,1 MiB Items: 613" In case I can provide more information for investigating this issue, please let me know. Thanks and best regards

Edit: For anyone with this issue, stopping and starting the Openmetrics plugin after saving the password in XO fixed it. I keep getting the {"error":"Query authentication does not match server setting"} problem, is there something I'm missing? I run XO proxied through Nginx with HTTPS, is there some additional config required to get it working? I have set the key with openssl rand -hex 32 and have verified that is saved correctly in the plugin, and that I am using the same key for curl. I am able to obtain the /health endpoint as expected, I just cannot obtain the full metrics, only returns that error. Command: curl --insecure -H "Authorization: Bearer mytoken" https://xo.mydomain.local/openmetrics/metrics XO commit: 91c5d I should note that running the command inside my Docker container returns only the error, including the health endpoint. Do I need to expose 9004?

The sr.scan-driven SMlog growth angle that gumbo2k surfaced is a real lead; there's some context in the storage-related log files reference, but the docs don't go as far as "here's how to throttle it safely on a pool where the underlying disks should spin down." Soft ping to @Team-Storage and @Team-Hypervisor-Kernel: could one of you weigh in on whether other-config:auto-scan=false on the SR is the supported way to reduce scan pressure, or if there's a better lever? I don't want to send anyone down a path that breaks an SR. Apologies if this has already been answered somewhere I haven't seen.

Nice find! Is there's any plan for Debian to backport that patch?

@MajorP93 stress of VM migration XD good luck with your V2Vs !