We have been using CR at work for over a year now and it is working great. There is no point of using the DR-feature since it is way slower and doesnt support incremental backups.

To answer @Pechkin000 original question: If you build yourself from the sources you get the LATEST. The appliance is build from the exact same sources, but is then tested for a while before it is realeased.

At work we're using the appliance, at home I am using "from sources" and to be honest I havent had any issues with my "from sources"-version.
All tho, if you are running an enterprise-shop you should really really know what you are doing if you decide to go with the "from sources"-version since this is pretty much untested.

I dont understand why @mropen is being so dramatic - Did you have any issues with the "from sources"-version?

@S-Pam Having a VIF for management and one for storage-traffic is a good solution, we do it that way to avoid crippling management during backups.

We have been using CR at work for over a year now and it is working great. There is no point of using the DR-feature since it is way slower and doesnt support incremental backups.

@akurzawa I think the stats looks fine to be honest. Maybe there is something with the TCP offloading but I have no experience from that.
Please share if you manage to find anything that speeds up the performance.

@kevdog said in HTTP to HTTPS redirection:

@nikade Hey thanks for for the link. I ended up just using a LetsEncrypt cert rather than self signed. I think had to add a DNS host override on my router to associate the Local LAN address of the xo server with the domain name of the server contained in the certificate -- Like 10.0.1.50 ---> xo.example.com. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction on this one.

Yeah that is a good solution as well, I hope this helps others in the future who wants to secure their XO with https

To be honest there is a lot of "magic" stuff happening during the handling of disks. I've noticed as well there there might be activity on the sources-server before the destination-server even reacts.

I guess you'd have to read the code to be able to give a certain answer to that question - All tho I wouldnt suprise me if there is some snapshotting and stuff going on on the source-server.

Are you using 7200k disks by any chance? The increase going to 10k or even 15k sas-drives is incredible and I know that XS/XCP is really picky when it comes to I/O.
Even our machines at work that has PERC H710p controllers with 1Gb cache and SSD-drives seems slow at times....

Oh I see, sorry for reading a bit too fast @akurzawa
I dont use the Disaster-recovery myself, we use Continous-replication because we want it to be incremental.

Is tapdisk reaching 100% on both hosts or only on the sender?

I have been running Windows 10 and Windows Server 2016 now for a long time on xcp-ng.
last weekend I upgraded one of my test-servers to xcp-ng 8.0 and Windows Server 2016 still runs fine.
This is the output of systeminfo

C:\Windows\system32>systeminfo

Host Name:                 HEL-DC1
OS Name:                   Microsoft Windows Server 2016 Standard
OS Version:                10.0.14393 N/A Build 14393
OS Manufacturer:           Microsoft Corporation
OS Configuration:          Primary Domain Controller
OS Build Type:             Multiprocessor Free
Registered Owner:          Windows User
Registered Organization:
Product ID:                00377-60000-00000-AA934
Original Install Date:     2018-10-20, 17:26:33
System Boot Time:          2019-10-01, 23:13:37
System Manufacturer:       Xen
System Model:              HVM domU
System Type:               x64-based PC
Processor(s):              1 Processor(s) Installed.
                           [01]: Intel64 Family 6 Model 158 Stepping 9 GenuineIntel ~3600 Mhz
BIOS Version:              Xen 4.7.5-5.4.1.xcp, 2018-08-02

I am using these tools:

@kevdog said in HTTP to HTTPS redirection:

I'm just curious on using this --- do you have a SSL cert with the server name and are you accessing XO through an address like: https://xoserver.example.com? I'm just curious since my XO server is located at 10.0.1.11 and Chrome states cert is invalid -- since I believe SSL needs to resolve to hostnames and not IP addresses.

I have generated a self-signed certificate which I am using to reach my XOA. You can do this very easily by using the "openssl"-tool.
https://www.linux.com/tutorials/creating-self-signed-ssl-certificates-apache-linux/ explains how to create both they cert and key-files that you need.

It would be interesting if you could try the DR-copy to another remote-machine just to see if tapdisk is as busy.
I noted that it is having a rather high % in the busy-column, around 90%, which would indicate that there's a bottleneck somewhere.

Did you try any other backup-type to a remote nfs for example?

Thanks for the output. Is this "top" running while you are doing a DR? I dont see any processes related to copying vdi's or even sparse_dd.

1. How many VM's do you have running on this host?
2. What does "top" show on the two hosts when a backup-job is running?
3. XO is very much depending on the storage you are backing up to, what kind of remote are you using and are you able to benchmark it with something else than xcp-ng?