Daniel P. Berrange schrieb: >On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 11:38:13PM -0500, Matthew Farrellee wrote: > >>It doesn't appear to be the case that the libvirtd daemon can trivially >>restart and continue with no interruptions. Right now it loses track of >>VMs. >> > >That a is a bug then, if you can reproduce it, please file a BZ ticket >so we can track it down & fix it. > > >>In a scenario where VMs are not deployed and locked to specific physical >>nodes, it can be highly valuable to have ways to ensure a VM is no >>longer running when a layer of its management stops functioning. >> > >IMHO this is a problem to be solved by clustering software. If the >clustering software detects a failure with the management service, >then it should power fence the entire node. Relying on management >service failure to kill the VMs will never be reliable enough. > I think he is pointing towards a VM that runs on a host where it isn't defined at via a corresponding *.xml. If you restart a libvirt i looses connection to this or these specific VM(s).