Xen Orchestra Upgrading
-
@JaredBusch You don't get it. It's not about the XO code itself, it's all about dependencies.
Eg. by making a CRON job which
git pull(no problem) everyday but alsonpm i: that's the issue. If a related dependency changed, and even XO doesn't, you could break the software. We saw the issue recently with lodash team making a big mistake which affected a LOT of projects using it.edit: again, that's the point of XOA: packing something with QA on the software but also on dependencies. You can imagine this like a distro.
-
@olivier said:
@JaredBusch You don't get it. It's not about the XO code itself, it's all about dependencies.
Eg. by making a CRON job which
git pull(no problem) everyday but alsonpm i: that's the issue. If a related dependency changed, and even XO doesn't, you could break the software. We saw the issue recently with lodash team making a big mistake which affected a LOT of projects using it.edit: again, that's the point of XOA: packing something with QA on the software but also on dependencies.
Ok, that is more clear then. Your problem is other packages break your stuff.
This is the same problem I have with NodeBB.
-
Yes, random stuff is catching NodeBB quite often, although it has gotten loads better.
-
@JaredBusch That's a common problem is software development ^^ That's why Linux distributions exists: gathering a lot of small programs and making them working together.
-
@olivier said:
@JaredBusch That's a common problem is software development ^^ That's why Linux distributions exists: gathering a lot of small programs and making them working together.
The solution in my mind is then to have some method of controlling what
npm idoes with various versions. I believe that you can manually pull specific versions fornpmbut that is all something I only tinkered with to date. -
Yes, NPM can definitely be controlled.
-
We don't want to stick manually on version for each dependency (there is a lot of them). And what about dependencies of dependencies? That's a HUGE thing to manage manually.
-
@JaredBusch said in Xen Orchestra Upgrading:
All of @DustinB3403's fanboy enthusiasm aside, this is yet another reason why XO is not something ready for prime time in the SMB space. It is too much work.
By extension, this is also why XS is not ready for prime time in the SMB space. In this space we generally need ready built tools that take little to no fiddling to keep up to date and active.
As an ITSP, I can assure you that it is much more cost effective for my client to run Hyper-V and buy Veeam than to pay my rates setting up and maintaining something like XO.
The same goes for the in house lone wolf IT guy. His time is not free, no matter how some people look at salary employees.
Don't get me wrong, I like XS and XOA looks awesome, but for the price point, I will still recommend something stable that has been around longer (Veeam). Dropping the Price point means using XO and that is simply too much in man hours.
Just curious if @JaredBusch opinion is different or still the same?
-
Note this opinion is on XS + XO from the sources. If you pay for the turnkey version (appliance + updater + support) this comment is not relevant.
-
@olivier said in Xen Orchestra Upgrading:
Note this opinion is on XS + XO from the sources. If you pay for the turnkey version (appliance + updater + support) this comment is not relevant.
Sure, but the turnkey version for an SMB is significantly more expensive than the SMB pricing for Veeam, so....
-
@Dashrender Depends on the number of sockets you have.
-
@olivier said in Xen Orchestra Upgrading:
@Dashrender Depends on the number of sockets you have.
Am I missing something on the pricing page? I don't see anything that talks about sockets. What I see are monthly pricing levels. Continuous Delta backups are listed under the Enterprise version at $200/month, $2400 year. The last time I purchased Veeam Small Business was like $800 + $130/yr for maintenance and updates. In my case I have only 2 sockets, but I think the license is inline with VMWare's essential package, supporting up to 6 sockets.
-
@Dashrender That's because our pricing is totally flat (against Veeam/VMware). So if XOA cost more for 2 sockets, it's not a general truth when you have more of them (that was the sense of my post)
-
@olivier said in Xen Orchestra Upgrading:
@Dashrender That's because our pricing is totally flat (against Veeam/VMware). So if XOA cost more for 2 sockets, it's not a general truth when you have more of them (that was the sense of my post)
and that's great - but it really does make it a difficult or impossible pill to swallow for the SMB market. With a hopeful consolidation, I should be down to 4 sockets (really I could do two if I had enough storage in a single box).
-
@Dashrender Having support for less than $70/mo. isn't worth it due to the market size (we can't have a "big scale" effect that VMWare/VEEAM can have).
-
What about 4 sockets for free without support and for personal use only?
-
@aaronstuder said in Xen Orchestra Upgrading:
What about 4 sockets for free without support and for personal use only?
Why do you need that? just use the XO version then.
-
@Dashrender It nice to have a appliance with easy updating.
-
@Dashrender It's perfect for a home lab, and your don't have to install from sources
-
Well if you go that route, why not make it free for everyone up to 2-4 sockets?
And no Oliver, I'm not really suggesting that.
