Hi, I'm having a little problem when triggering (live) migration from libvirt-java (libvirt.so at client is approx. 0.7.1), I get an error that the qemu:// driver for migration URIs is not supported, only qemu+tcp:// Strange thing is, with virsh at the same client (same libvirt.so), qemu:// works. Interestingly, the error message seems to come from libvirt.so and not libvirt-java. I'd like to avoid maintaining two different URIs/drivers for normal connections and migration destinations, especially as it works flawlessly (and fast!) with virsh? Has anyone clues where this twisted-mind behaviour could come from?

On Monday 16 November 2009 14:42:16 you wrote: > On 11/16/2009 12:33 AM, Thomas Treutner wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'm having a little problem when triggering (live) migration from >> libvirt-java (libvirt.so at client is approx. 0.7.1), I get an error that >> the qemu:// driver for migration URIs is not supported, only qemu+tcp:// >> >> Strange thing is, with virsh at the same client (same libvirt.so), >> qemu:// works. Interestingly, the error message seems to come from >> libvirt.so and not libvirt-java. >> >> I'd like to avoid maintaining two different URIs/drivers for normal >> connections and migration destinations, especially as it works flawlessly >> (and fast!) with virsh? >> >> Has anyone clues where this twisted-mind behaviour could come from? > > What is the full argument list you are passing to the migrate function? > You should only see that 'tcp' error if you are passing an explicit URI, > which isn't required for standard migration. domain.migrate(dst, 1, null, dstIP, 0); where dst is a Connect object created with qemu://nodeX/system - I'm also passing a destination IP, could that be the problem? I used this code with Xen before. I have two ethXs, one for iSCSI, libvirt, .. and one for br0. dstIP is the same IP dst points to, but if it's possible, I'd like to let it be configurable that way. Ah, javadoc says I'm using an URI ;) I'll try your suggestions ASAP.