On Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Joshua Nichols wrote: > On Jun 19, 2009, at 3:43 PM, [email protected] wrote: >> my big problem with live migration (especially as a disaster recovery >> 'solution') is that if the running machine dies it's too late to do a live >> migration. If the application is important enough to need failover and >> disaster recovery I need it to be able to survive a system just >> disappearing, and so I need it to be able to recover on the new machine >> without having the old machine available to migrate from, and if I have >> that anyway, why not use that instead of live migration? > > I'm pretty sure vMotion works just fine even if the first host loses power > suddenly. We've lab tested a wide variety of "very bad" scenarios, and each > time it migrated the machine efficiently enough that ping tests to the VM > itself didn't even drop packets. (Delayed, sure, but...)
what is buffering the ping packets so that they get sent to the second system once it comes up? David Lang _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
