On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 08:51:05AM +0800, liguang wrote: > 在 2012-09-04二的 12:12 +0100，Daniel P. Berrange写道： > > On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 02:23:24PM +0800, liguang wrote: > > > allow migration even domain isn't active by > > > inserting some stubs to tunnel migration path. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: liguang <lig.fnst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > src/qemu/qemu_driver.c | 2 +- > > > src/qemu/qemu_migration.c | 181 > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > > > src/qemu/qemu_migration.h | 3 +- > > > 3 files changed, 178 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > > I really don't like the general design of this patch, even > > ignoring all the code bugs. I think this entire patch is > > really just a solution in search of a problem. Offline migration > > is already possible with existing libvirt APIs: > > > > domsrc = virDomainLookupByName(connsrc, "someguest"); > > xml = virDomainGetXMLDesc(domsrc); > > domdst virDomainDefine(conndst, xml); > > > > Um, maybe you mean offline migration is just redefinition of domain at > target side, but what about disk images the domain used without sharing > files between source and target, do we have to take a look at this case? Which can also be done already virStorageVolDownload + virStorageVolUpload which lets the app choose exactly which disks images they wish to copy, rather than assuming all of them should be copied. 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 :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list