(2012/09/06 14:32), liguang wrote:
Hello, Eric & Daniel
在 2012-09-05三的 11:08 -0600，Eric Blake写道：
On 09/05/2012 02:48 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
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:
I agree that the existing patches are making too many assumptions and
not honoring flags correctly; but I'm still not sure why the user must
decompose offline migration into a sequence of calls...
yes, my original thought was to do all things together.
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
...when a single virMigrate API could do the same decomposition as
syntactic sugar, if the patch were cleaned up to actually obey flags.
That is, why must virMigrate be a live-only operation, forcing
virt-manager and all other wrappers to re-implement the same giant
sequence of API calls for offline migration?
so, libvirt may prefer APIs do one thing only?
maybe I have to just migrate the definition.
Can you try to move the definition in an atomic way ?
copy to the dest + delete the original with preventing other ops to the
target vm. I hope virsh migrate can support this "move" of definition....
Thanks,
-Kame
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list