Dan Smith wrote:
RJ> Some issues around migration which are up for discussion: Something else to consider is whether or not we "undefine" hosts leaving one machine during a migration. Last time I checked, Xen left a domain in "powered-off" state on the source. It seems to make more sense to me for a migration to remove the shell domain from the source machine. What will be the expected behavior here?
For KVM, the guest isn't destroyed explicitly after a migration is successful. Instead, the source guest is left in a paused state. The main reason for not destroying the guest was so that a management tool could still interact with the guest's monitor to obtain statistics on the migration. It's expected that the management tool will destroy the domain on the source machine whenever it is done working with it.
The KVM source guest is still resumable too so this doubles as a mechanism for forking VMs. I think these are useful semantics that ought to be exposed. With KVM, live migration is more generic. You can use it to do light-weight checkpointing.
Regards, Anthony Liguori -- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list