XCP-ng support

[bishoptf]

+1 for the many SMB that are out there that will need to migrate from VMware. I am happy that you are supporting Proxmox but would really like to see XCP-ng support at the hypervisor level. XCP-ng appears to be a better fit for smaller shops imho, would love to continue using veeam.

[stagnant]

+100 for XCP-ng support. It's proven a great VMware alternative for some customers. The deployment is simple and admin learning curve for a VMware admin is low. We've also heard good things about support (especially compared to Proxmox).

[XxPatrickxX]

+1 for XCP-ng support. VMware is going the way of the dodo for 99% of customers in the near term.

Alternatives
Nutanix - for some but for many it's the same cost as VMware
Proxmox - fleet management is a problem, NBD support is a hard no for some businesses, iSCSI support is not fully featured.
Hyper-V - if your a heavy Microsoft shop then likely is an option, Hyper-V Manager or WAC work well for very small deployments. SCVMM works well for very large deployments, larger SMB and smaller SME is where i've been seeing a lot of friction.

[Gostev]

Don't forget OLVM (available now) and Scale Computing (in beta now, planning to ship next month).

[olivierlambert]

Hello there!

Just to give some news: our preview integration of Qcow2 format is now plugged from XCP-ng to Xen Orchestra, so we have an end-to-end way to use larger volumes AND the capacity on the API to backup and restore them! (more details at https://xen-orchestra.com/blog/xen-orchestra-5-108/ -> note this is the amount of stuff we are releasing in just a month, you can judge by yourself that we have a fairly good momentum on the product). There's also an article explaining in details all the work achieved or in the pipes for that Qcow2 support: https://xcp-ng.org/blog/2025/06/27/qcow ... orage-path

[bishoptf]

Don't forget OLVM (available now) and Scale Computing (in beta now, planning to ship next month).

Nice to have options but really not sure from a SMB who would trust oracle at this point. Scale computing is nice but again from small businesses that already have decent hardware it's not something we are looking into. For most smb I believe are looking into open source alternatives that will provide a low cost alternative to VMware, so far for us XCP-NG looks to be a better fit, we already have a Veeam license and really would like to have the agent-less option available. Hopefully Veeam can work it into their busy backlog, right now its really the only main issue,well that and UPS integration for XCP-NG but that is another discussion altogether.

[Gostev]

For most smb I believe are looking into open source alternatives that will provide a low cost alternative to VMware

Not to derail this topic, but OLVM is open source and it's free

[bishoptf]

For whatever reason I am unable to quote your reply properly...

OLVM is open source and it's free

and has the name Oracle in it...again I would never trust them again, they have burned way to many bridges at least for me...fool me once...etc..

[tsukraw]

For what it is worth.
We have started deploying XCP-ng to our SMB clients and are currently utilizing the Veeam agent backup method, though it is not ideal.

For those of you considering XCP-ng for SMB, they do have a single host license available if you want the official XCP-ng release with support.
The single host license is not a published SKU. Makes it very affordable for clients and gets you the official supported distribution of XCP-ng.
Plus, the margin on XCP-ng licensing is actually fairly decent, way better then VMware's 0% they left us with.

[florentbchp]

having shareholder that are not too greedy changes a lot of things

I hope everything goes as intended Gostev, feel free to ask if you need any help. On our end we are working with vddk to speed up migration. Are you using it to get data from esxi/vsphere ?

[jmannik]

Do we have any further updates on XCP-ng support?
I am currently using agent based methods for being able to restore client OS files, and XCP-ng backups for full backups of the VM's themselves. Would like to move it all to Veeam though...

[Gostev]

We plan to give a technical preview to Vates (XCP maintainers) and a few select enthusiasts in the next few days. QA does not want a more public beta yet because they did not touch the plug-in yet (autotests only). So we will decide what's next based on the initial feedback.

[tsukraw]

@Gostev
We would be more than happy to assist in trying out a technical preview and provide feedback if you are looking for some enthusiastic candidates

We are actively moving the majority if not all of our VMware clients to XCP-ng as well as have a lab environment setup for testing.
Compatibility with Veeam would be a major relief for us.

[datpa]

We plan to give a technical preview to Vates (XCP maintainers) and a few select enthusiasts in the next few days. QA does not want a more public beta yet because they did not touch the plug-in yet (autotests only). So we will decide what's next based on the initial feedback.

Great news!
Thanks for working on this!

We are currently migrating from VMWare to XCP-ng and would be very happy if we could switch back from Xen Orchestra Backup to Veeam this year!

[olivierlambert]

We plan to give a technical preview to Vates (XCP maintainers) and a few select enthusiasts in the next few days. QA does not want a more public beta yet because they did not touch the plug-in yet (autotests only). So we will decide what's next based on the initial feedback.

Excellent! I will make sure everyone is able to test/assist on Vates' side

[Gostev]

@tsukraw I plan to expand this preview to public immediately after getting green light from Vates (that we're not doing anything terribly wrong that impacts the hypervisor) as well as from a few XCP-NG enthusiasts from the "close circle" aka Veeam100. This way we don't waste time of entire XCP community with any obvious teething issues. So please watch this thread for further updates on availability.

[Razvan_Vates]

For those of you considering XCP-ng for SMB, they do have a single host license available if you want the official XCP-ng release with support. The single host license is not a published SKU.

Hey, Razvan from Vates here. This bundle is currently in internal testing and is available only to a small group of selected Partners. There are no plans to release it for production. Access is provided manually, without Pre-Sales Support, and L1 Support is handled solely by the Partner.

Since this is just a pilot with limited availability, I recommend not making business plans around it for now. For smaller deployments, Essential or EssentialPlus may be a better choice.

[olivierlambert]

@tsukraw I plan to expand this preview to public immediately after getting green light from Vates (that we're not doing anything terribly wrong that impacts the hypervisor) as well as from a few XCP-NG enthusiasts from the "close circle" aka Veeam100. This way we don't waste time of entire XCP community with any obvious teething issues. So please watch this thread for further updates on availability.

Email just received I'm in the process of giving access internally to the prototype and also giving some NFRs for your teams to have everything they need to test without any restrictions. We should have first feedback next week. Thanks again!