On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 09:30:27AM +0800, liguang wrote:
original migration did not aware of offline case,
so, try to support offline migration quietly
(did not disturb original migration) by pass
VIR_MIGRATE_OFFLINE flag to migration APIs if only
the domain is really inactive, and
migration process will not puzzled by domain
offline and exit unexpectedly.
these changes did not take care of disk images the
domain required, for them could be transferred by
other APIs as suggested, then VIR_MIGRATE_OFFLINE
should not combined with VIR_MIGRATE_NON_SHARED_*.
if you want a persistent migration,
you should do "virsh migrate --persistent" youself.
v12:
rebased for conflicting with commit 2f3e2c0c434218a3d656c08779cb98b327170e11,
and take in some messages from Doug Goldstein's patch
https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2012-October/msg00957.html
Great, the patch is now behaving exactly as I expect. I've only
one question - in the logs of libvirtd on the target host I always
see a warning message:
2012-11-02 12:07:08.789+0000: 31375: warning : qemuDomainObjSetJobPhase:690 :
'migration in' async job is owned by thread 31374
I'm not sure what we're doing to trigger it, but I think we need
to find out & avoid it.
I would ack the patch if we can fix the warning
Daniel
--
|:
http://berrange.com -o-
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|:
http://libvirt.org -o-
http://virt-manager.org :|
|:
http://autobuild.org -o-
http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|:
http://entangle-photo.org -o-
http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|