Thanks for the clarification, is there a bug tracking this in libvirt
already?
Actually I don't think there is one, so feel free to file one
I took the liberty of doing so:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208588
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 6:11 PM, Daniel P. Berrange
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 08:33:26AM +0100, Thomas Herve wrote:
Interesting bug. I think I agree with you that there isn't a good solution
currently for instances that have a mix of shared and not-shared storage.
I'm curious what Daniel meant by saying that marking the disk shareable is
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 01:33:26PM -0700, Joe Gordon wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 1:38 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:09:33PM -0700, Rafi Khardalian wrote:
I am concerned about how block migration functions when Cinder volumes
are
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 3:09 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 08:33:26AM +0100, Thomas Herve wrote:
Interesting bug. I think I agree with you that there isn't a good
solution
currently for instances that have a mix of shared and not-shared
Interesting bug. I think I agree with you that there isn't a good solution
currently for instances that have a mix of shared and not-shared storage.
I'm curious what Daniel meant by saying that marking the disk shareable is
not
as reliable as we would want.
I think this is the bug I
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 10:59:19AM -0700, Joe Gordon wrote:
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 3:09 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 08:33:26AM +0100, Thomas Herve wrote:
Interesting bug. I think I agree with you that there isn't a good
solution
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 1:38 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:09:33PM -0700, Rafi Khardalian wrote:
I am concerned about how block migration functions when Cinder volumes
are
attached to an instance being migrated. We noticed some unexpected
On 03/17/2015 02:33 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
Digging up this old thread because I am working on getting multi node live
migration testing working (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/165182/), and just
ran into this issue (bug 1398999).
And I am not sure I agree with this statement. I think there is
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 01:39:21PM +1300, Robert Collins wrote:
On 19 June 2014 at 20:38, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:09:33PM -0700, Rafi Khardalian wrote:
I am concerned about how block migration functions when Cinder volumes are
attached to an
On 19 June 2014 at 20:38, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:09:33PM -0700, Rafi Khardalian wrote:
I am concerned about how block migration functions when Cinder volumes are
attached to an instance being migrated. We noticed some unexpected
behavior
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 01:39:21PM +1300, Robert Collins wrote:
Just ran across this from bug
https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1398999. Is there some way to
signal to libvirt that some block devices shouldn't be migrated by it
but instead are known to be networked etc? Or put another way,
I am concerned about how block migration functions when Cinder volumes are
attached to an instance being migrated. We noticed some unexpected
behavior recently, whereby attached generic NFS-based volumes would become
entirely unsparse over the course of a migration. After spending some time
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:09:33PM -0700, Rafi Khardalian wrote:
I am concerned about how block migration functions when Cinder volumes are
attached to an instance being migrated. We noticed some unexpected
behavior recently, whereby attached generic NFS-based volumes would become
entirely
][libvirt] Block migrations and
Cinder volumes
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:09:33PM -0700, Rafi Khardalian wrote:
I am concerned about how block migration functions when Cinder volumes
are
attached to an instance being migrated. We noticed some unexpected
behavior recently, whereby attached
:Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][libvirt] Block migrations and
Cinder volumes
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:09:33PM -0700, Rafi Khardalian wrote:
I am concerned about how block migration functions when Cinder volumes are
attached to an instance being migrated. We
15 matches
Mail list logo