Avi Kivity wrote: > On 11/03/2009 11:40 AM, Liran Schour wrote: >> - Liran >> >> Avi Kivity<a...@redhat.com> wrote on 02/11/2009 20:47:34: >> >>> On 11/02/2009 03:40 PM, lir...@il.ibm.com wrote: >>> >>>> This series adds support for live migration without shared storage, >>>> >> means >> >>>> copy the storage while migrating. It was tested with KVM. Supports 2 >>>> >> ways >> >>>> to replicate the storage during migration: >>>> 1. Complete copy of storage to destination >>>> 2. Assuming the storage is cow based, copy only the allocated >>>> data, time of the migration will be linear with the amount of allocated >>>> data (user responsibility to verify that the same backend file reside >>>> on src and destination). >>>> >>>> Live migration will work as follows: >>>> (qemu) migrate -d tcp:0:4444 # for ordinary live migration >>>> (qemu) migrate -d blk tcp:0:4444 # for live migration with >>>> >>> complete storage copy >>> >>>> (qemu) migrate -d blk inc tcp:0:4444 # for live migration with >>>> >>> incremental storage copy, storage is cow based. >>> >>>> >>> I'd like to see the syntax generalized. For one, the guest may have >>> several disks; an install image cdrom might be available as an nfs image >>> but the main storage is local. Secondly, there can be several levels of >>> cow and we want to control which one we copy. >>> >>> I'll leave the exact details to the qpeople, but if we can specify a >>> copy depth for each device, where 0=copy nothing, n=copy everything, >>> 1=copy the last level (equivalent to -d blk inc) I think we'll have >>> covered everything. >>> >> I propose the following syntax: >> migrate [-d] [-b [<device:copy_level> ...<device:copy_level>]] >> tcp:<host>:<port> >> Where device will be the name of the device: ide0-hd0. And copy_level >> will >> be integer or n, 0=flat copy of the device, 1=copy the last level ... >> n=copy all levels. >> All HD devices that will not appear in the command will be treated as >> copy_level=0. All devices != BDRV_TYPE_HD will be ignored. >> >> > > Looks good. >
Do I get this correctly: this series is now "only" blocked by the required rework of its user interface? Is there a schedule for this, a v6 roll out? Will it be in time for qemu-0.12? Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1 Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
