[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [PATCH 2/6] migration: introduce savevm, loadvm, delvm QMP commands

From: Peter Krempa
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] migration: introduce savevm, loadvm, delvm QMP commands
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 12:41:10 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.14.3 (2020-06-14)

On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 12:33:31 +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 07.07.2020 um 08:38 hat Peter Krempa geschrieben:
> > On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 18:15:55 +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> > > Am 03.07.2020 um 18:02 hat Daniel P. Berrangé geschrieben:


> > IMO we really want this also for external snapshots. Driving the
> > migration as standard migration is really suboptimal especially when the
> > user wants minimal downtime. Transactioning a post-copy style copy-on
> > write migration would simplify this a lot. I agree though that this is
> > for a different conversation.
> This is an interesting point actually. And while the implementation of
> the post-copy style live snapshotting is for a different conversation, I
> think the implications it has on the API are relevant for us now.
> But even if we have an all-in-one snapshot job instead of a transaction
> to group all the individual operations together, I think you could still
> represent that by just specifying an empty list of nodes to be
> snapshotted. (I feel this is another argument for passing the nodes to
> include rather than nodes to exclude from the disk snapshot.)

Definitely. From libvirt's POV it's IMO simpler and more future-proof to
enumerate everything rather than keep a database of what to skip.

reply via email to

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