Hi Swen,
Yes appreciate this – this is why shared storage is better for this scenario –
no merging of disks.
Regards,
Dag Sonstebo
Cloud Architect
ShapeBlue
On 23/01/2017, 11:37, "S. Brüseke - proIO GmbH" wrote:
Hi Dag,
good point! Thank you for bringing it up.
Our situation
Hi Dag,
good point! Thank you for bringing it up.
Our situation is that we need to use storage live migration to do XenServer
updates anyway.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / With kind regards,
Swen
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Dag Sonstebo [mailto:dag.sonst...@shapeblue.com]
Gesendet: Mo
Hi Swen,
Keep in mind what you are doing during this process – the migration effectively
merges the disk chain for each VM to a single bigger disk, which will now take
up a lot more space on the destination than on the source storage pool. This
won’t matter with a single VM – but if you have mu
Hi, All
I finally figured it out.
I should have mount the secondary storage at Management Server. Then download
the system VM.
When I created the Zone, system VM was started then secondary storage displayed
its capacity.
Thanks,
-Original Message-
From: 조대형 [mailto:carl...@renet.kr
I did some testing and want to share my findings:
When using local storage a way to delete old templates which are stuck because
of a XenServer chain is to perform a live migration and move the vm to another
host. The chain will be deleted and after the clean up job of CS did run the
template wi
