On Wed, 26 May 2010 11:55:31 -0500
Anthony Liguori anth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
On 05/26/2010 10:15 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 09:54:22AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 05/26/2010 05:33 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
I'm not sure why you would need
Luiz Capitulino lcapitul...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 26 May 2010 11:55:31 -0500
Anthony Liguori anth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
That's exactly how the protocol is designed. That was one of the major
improvements of QMP over the human monior.
Yes and it already has 'id' support:
{
On 05/27/2010 10:58 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
Luiz Capitulinolcapitul...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 26 May 2010 11:55:31 -0500
Anthony Liguorianth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
That's exactly how the protocol is designed. That was one of the major
improvements of QMP over the human
On Thu, 27 May 2010 17:58:03 +0200
Juan Quintela quint...@redhat.com wrote:
Luiz Capitulino lcapitul...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 26 May 2010 11:55:31 -0500
Anthony Liguori anth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
That's exactly how the protocol is designed. That was one of the major
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 11:33:15AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 05/25/2010 11:25 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
With some disk locking
approaches we need todo a lock transfer before allowing the dest
to continue running.
QEMU is going to read the disk before the migration completes so
On 05/26/2010 05:33 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
I'm not sure why you would need a notification of when migration
starts (since you know when you've started migration).
But you don't know if the other end knows that it has also started.
started is needed only in incoming part, because
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 09:54:22AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 05/26/2010 05:33 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
I'm not sure why you would need a notification of when migration
starts (since you know when you've started migration).
But you don't know if the other end knows that it
On 05/26/2010 10:15 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 09:54:22AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 05/26/2010 05:33 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
I'm not sure why you would need a notification of when migration
starts (since you know when you've started migration).
Anthony Liguori anth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
On 05/25/2010 09:21 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
+MIGRATION_CANCELED
+--
+
+Emitted when migration is canceled. This is emitted in the source.
+Target will emit MIGRATION_FAILED (no way to differentiate a FAILED
+and CANCELED
On 05/25/2010 10:35 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
Anthony Liguorianth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
On 05/25/2010 09:21 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
+MIGRATION_CANCELED
+--
+
+Emitted when migration is canceled. This is emitted in the source.
+Target will emit MIGRATION_FAILED
Anthony Liguori anth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
On 05/25/2010 10:35 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
problem here is that libvirt start target with -S, and waits to do the
cont as soon as possible. As of know, only way to do it is to poll
info migrate on source faster.
Why does it do that??
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 10:57:33AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 05/25/2010 10:35 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
Anthony Liguorianth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
+Data: None
+
+Example:
+
+{ event: MIGRATION_CANCELED,
+timestamp: {seconds: 1274687575, microseconds: 592483} }
Anthony Liguori anth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
On 05/25/2010 10:35 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
problem here is that libvirt start target with -S, and waits to do the
cont as soon as possible. As of know, only way to do it is to poll
info migrate on source faster.
Why does it do that??
On 05/25/2010 11:04 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
Anthony Liguorianth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
On 05/25/2010 10:35 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
problem here is that libvirt start target with -S, and waits to do the
cont as soon as possible. As of know, only way to do it is to poll
info
On 05/25/2010 11:25 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 06:04:17PM +0200, Juan Quintela wrote:
Anthony Liguorianth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
On 05/25/2010 10:35 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
problem here is that libvirt start target with -S, and waits to do
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 06:04:17PM +0200, Juan Quintela wrote:
Anthony Liguori anth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
On 05/25/2010 10:35 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
problem here is that libvirt start target with -S, and waits to do the
cont as soon as possible. As of know, only way to do it is to
Anthony Liguori anth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
On 05/25/2010 11:25 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 06:04:17PM +0200, Juan Quintela wrote:
Anthony Liguorianth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
I'm not sure why you would need a notification of when migration
starts (since you
On Tue, 25 May 2010 11:10:23 -0500
Anthony Liguori anth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
There should be some information about why it failed, no? Preferrably
in a QError format.
At this point, we have basically -1 :(
I can add a field with an error number, but we are very bad at
On Tue, 25 May 2010 17:35:53 +0200
Juan Quintela quint...@redhat.com wrote:
Anthony Liguori anth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
On 05/25/2010 09:21 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
+MIGRATION_CANCELED
+--
+
+Emitted when migration is canceled. This is emitted in the source.
Luiz Capitulino lcapitul...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 25 May 2010 17:35:53 +0200
Juan Quintela quint...@redhat.com wrote:
Anthony Liguori anth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
On 05/25/2010 09:21 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
+MIGRATION_CANCELED
+--
+
+Emitted when migration is
On 05/24/2010 10:25 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:
+MIGRATION_CANCELED
+--
+
+Emitted when migration is canceled. This is emitted in the source.
+Target will emit MIGRATION_CANCELED (no way to differentiate a FAILED
+and CANCELED migration).
Copy-paste error? (or if not, parse error
21 matches
Mail list logo
