From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Andrew D. Ball" Subject: current domU lifecycle work ? Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 17:14:08 -0500 Message-ID: <4410A8B0.3060103@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Is anyone working on supporting different types of domU lifecycles at the moment? Ignoring configuration file based domU persistence, I'm told that it's possible to have a domU stay around in xenstore after shutting it down, but that I ought not to do that because it's buggy. Having the following primitives supports more lifecycle models than the behavior I see from xm create and xm destroy, where xm destroy causes xend to forget about the domU: (1) register a domU with xend (initializes a configuration in xenstore) (2) turn on that domU (3) turn off that domU (without removing it from xenstore) (4) unregister that domU with xend (this is destroying the domU). The lifecycle model where domU's disappear after being shutdown is great for lots of applications like grid computing and build systems that leave output and disappear. However, it does not support nearly as many lifecycle models as the four primitives above. Is anyone working on stabilizing this? Have I overlooked anything? Thanks for your help! Andrew =============== Andrew D. Ball