On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 01:54:53PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote: > Destroy is neither synchronous nor guaranteed. It's a request to the > hypervisor that isn't completed until all of the memory is completely > unmapped by any other domain that may be mapping it. > > If you want to be really robust, you shouldn't assume that the domain is > actually destroyed after doing a destroy. The race conditions, in > practice, are usually very small but they are still there. So is there any better way to block on destroy here ? In the clustering scenario its neccessary to 'fence' a misbehaving domain on a host before bringing it back online. From what you're saying it would appear to be neccessary to poll for completion of the destroy op before trying to restart the domain. Regards, Dan. -- |=- Red Hat, Engineering, Emerging Technologies, Boston. +1 978 392 2496 -=| |=- Perl modules: http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ -=| |=- Projects: http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/ -=| |=- GnuPG: 7D3B9505 F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 -=|