qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/4] Fix subsection ambiguity in the migrati


From: Anthony Liguori
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/4] Fix subsection ambiguity in the migration format
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 08:00:51 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110516 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10

On 07/26/2011 07:51 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi
<address@hidden>  wrote:
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 06:23:17PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
However, doing so imposes extra work on management tools - they need to
understand and drive negotiation.  If QEMU adds a new capability we
might even need to update management tools!

As a management tool author I would prefer the source and destination to
work it out amongst themselves so that I just issue the 'migrate'
command.  Negotiation can be done without the management tool's
involvement: fail migration if the initial negotation phase fails.

An advantage I didn't think of was that management tools handling
negotiation makes negotiation out-of-band and the migration protocol
doesn't need to be changed.

Not quite that, but that you can detect when the migration changes. For instance, this feature would allow the following behavior:

1) src doesn't know the new protocol, dst still supports the old protocol and the new protocol, migration uses old protocol.

2) src knows the new protocol, dst doesn't know the new protocol, old protocol is used.

3) src knows the new protocol, dst knows the new protocol, new protocol is used

4) src doesn't know the new protocol, dst chooses to only support the new protocol, migration fails gracefully.

Even if we only ever introduce a single feature, having the mechanism means that we can gracefully fail with a new format and have a transition period.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori


It seems like the migration protocol needs an overhaul sooner or later
anyway, so perhaps it's not work making the negotiation external.

Stefan





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]