On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 11:02:15AM -0800, Michael Rodrigues wrote:
On 1/31/2013 10:40 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 10:35:17AM -0800, Michael Rodrigues wrote:
>>Hi Daniel,
>>
>>I thought migration might be the reason, but I'm still not seeing
>>the behavior you describe with regards to pausing. I saw the
>>following behavior:
>>
>>1. Created VM on node 1
>>2. Started VM on node 1
>>3. Migrated VM to node 2, node 1 is now shutdown, node 2 is running
>>4. I paused node 2
>>5. I started node 1, no error
>>6. Paused node 1
>>7. Unpaused node 2, no err
>>
>>I thought maybe the original VM had to be paused first, so I tried
>>that as well:
>>
>>1. Created VM on node 1
>>2. Started VM on node 1
>>3. Migrated to node 2, node 1 is now shutdown, node 2 is running
>>4. I shutdown node 2 instead of pausing
>>5. I started node 1
>>6. I paused node 1
>>7. Started node 2
>>8. Paused node 2
>>9. Started node 1
>Hmm, that isn't supposed to be possible. When you paused node 1
>in step 6, it was supposed to record the lease version number.
>When you resume in step 9, the version number should mis-match
>due to step 7, and thus sandlock ought to have caused an error
>at step 9. If that didn't happen, then I believe we have a bug
Should I file a report? I'm not really a developer but I can provide
whatever information is necessary for a proper report. I don't have
RHEL or a bugzilla account.
Yes, please do file a bug report including this scenario to
reproduce
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 :|