On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 02:45:41PM +1000, Blair Bethwaite wrote: > Hi Michael! > > On 11 September 2014 14:13, Michael Chapman <m...@very.puzzling.org> wrote: > > Why is RBD is handled specially in this function? The current logic is that > > an RBD-backed disk is safe to be migrated even if it's got caching enabled, > > but I'm not sure how RBD is different from other backends in this regard. > > I recall this has was discussed before but am having trouble finding > the thread. I think the gist of it was that the rbd integration was > just lucky, but it wasn't using the appropriate interfaces defined by > libvirt for flushing. > > And I think Debian patches away the qemuMigrationIsSafe pass for RBD, > so it'll only pass for cache=none.
Debian doesn't ship such a patch. Cheers, -- Guido -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
