On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 13:44:33 +0200, Jano Tomko wrote:
> On 10/15/2013 02:42 PM, Jiri Denemark wrote:
> > From: WangYufei
> >
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019053
> >
> > When we migrate vms concurrently, there's a chance that libvirtd on
> > destination assigns the same po
On 10/15/2013 02:42 PM, Jiri Denemark wrote:
> From: WangYufei
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019053
>
> When we migrate vms concurrently, there's a chance that libvirtd on
> destination assigns the same port for different migrations, which will
> lead to migration failure duri
On 10/15/2013 02:42 PM, Jiri Denemark wrote:
> From: WangYufei
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019053
>
> When we migrate vms concurrently, there's a chance that libvirtd on
> destination assigns the same port for different migrations, which will
> lead to migration failure duri
From: WangYufei
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019053
When we migrate vms concurrently, there's a chance that libvirtd on
destination assigns the same port for different migrations, which will
lead to migration failure during prepare phase on destination. So we use
virPortAllocator