On 04.01.2012 15:14, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 01/04/2012 02:08 PM, Peter Lieven wrote:
thus my only option at the moment is to limit the runtime of the while
loop in stage 2 or
are there any post 1.0 patches in git that might already help?
No; even though (as I said) people are aware of the pr
On 04.01.2012 15:14, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
don't hold your breath
On 01/04/2012 02:08 PM, Peter Lieven wrote:
thus my only option at the moment is to limit the runtime of the while
loop in stage 2 or
are there any post 1.0 patches in git that might already help?
No; even though (as I said) people are aware of the problems and do plan
to fix them, don't hold
On 04.01.2012 13:28, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 01/04/2012 12:42 PM, Peter Lieven wrote:
ok, then i misunderstood the ram blocks thing. i thought the guest ram
would consist of a collection of ram blocks.
then let me describe it differntly. would it make sense to process
bigger portions of memory
On 01/04/2012 12:42 PM, Peter Lieven wrote:
ok, then i misunderstood the ram blocks thing. i thought the guest ram
would consist of a collection of ram blocks.
then let me describe it differntly. would it make sense to process
bigger portions of memory (e.g. 1M) in stage 2 to reduce the number
On 04.01.2012 12:28, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 01/04/2012 12:22 PM, Peter Lieven wrote:
There were patches to move RAM migration to a separate thread. The
problem is that they broke block migration.
However, asynchronous NBD is in and streaming will follow suit soon.
As soon as we have those two
On 01/04/2012 12:22 PM, Peter Lieven wrote:
There were patches to move RAM migration to a separate thread. The
problem is that they broke block migration.
However, asynchronous NBD is in and streaming will follow suit soon.
As soon as we have those two features, we might as well remove the
block
On 04.01.2012 12:05, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 01/04/2012 11:53 AM, Peter Lieven wrote:
On 04.01.2012 02:38, Shu Ming wrote:
On 2012-1-4 2:04, Peter Lieven wrote:
Hi all,
is there any known issue when migrating VMs with a lot of (e.g. 32GB)
of memory.
It seems that there is some portion in the
On 01/04/2012 11:53 AM, Peter Lieven wrote:
On 04.01.2012 02:38, Shu Ming wrote:
On 2012-1-4 2:04, Peter Lieven wrote:
Hi all,
is there any known issue when migrating VMs with a lot of (e.g. 32GB)
of memory.
It seems that there is some portion in the migration code which takes
too much time wh
On 04.01.2012 02:38, Shu Ming wrote:
On 2012-1-4 2:04, Peter Lieven wrote:
Hi all,
is there any known issue when migrating VMs with a lot of (e.g. 32GB)
of memory.
It seems that there is some portion in the migration code which takes
too much time when the number
of memory pages is large.
S
On 04.01.2012 02:38, Shu Ming wrote:
On 2012-1-4 2:04, Peter Lieven wrote:
Hi all,
is there any known issue when migrating VMs with a lot of (e.g. 32GB)
of memory.
It seems that there is some portion in the migration code which takes
too much time when the number
of memory pages is large.
S
On 2012-1-4 2:04, Peter Lieven wrote:
Hi all,
is there any known issue when migrating VMs with a lot of (e.g. 32GB)
of memory.
It seems that there is some portion in the migration code which takes
too much time when the number
of memory pages is large.
Symptoms are: Irresponsive VNC connecti
Hi all,
is there any known issue when migrating VMs with a lot of (e.g. 32GB)
of memory.
It seems that there is some portion in the migration code which takes
too much time when the number
of memory pages is large.
Symptoms are: Irresponsive VNC connection, VM stalls and also
irresponsive QE
13 matches
Mail list logo
