|
From: | Avi Kivity |
Subject: | Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4] XBZRLE delta for live migration of large memory apps |
Date: | Wed, 10 Aug 2011 19:40:45 +0300 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110707 Thunderbird/5.0 |
On 08/10/2011 07:23 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
Right now we have capabilties in the form of -help output. If -help says -no-xzbrle disable xzbrle support (or -migration-compression xzbrle=off, or something) that's sufficient for management tools.This is static, not dynamic. You may attempt to migrate to another host that supports it and then migrate to a second host that doesn't support it after the first migration fails.
This may be acceptable, wait until the entire migration cluster is xzbrle capable before enabling it. If not, add a monitor command.
We shouldn't block this feature just because some monitor facility is not yet implemented.We shouldn't make *any* changes to the migration protocol before we have a feature negotiation capability. I only want to do a hard break of the protocol once.
Didn't we agree that management tool mediated feature negotiation (that is, outside the migration protocol itself) is acceptable?
-- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |