From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:59051)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <takuya.yoshikawa@gmail.com>) id 1SgzWC-0005wd-9S
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 10:35:04 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <takuya.yoshikawa@gmail.com>) id 1SgzW5-0000o5-QC
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 10:34:55 -0400
Received: from mail-pz0-f45.google.com ([209.85.210.45]:65374)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <takuya.yoshikawa@gmail.com>) id 1SgzW5-0000n6-HX
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 10:34:49 -0400
Received: by dadn2 with SMTP id n2so7950689dad.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 07:34:47 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 23:34:42 +0900
From: Takuya Yoshikawa <takuya.yoshikawa@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <20120619233442.d9e64a17f9a29d9ed3faff49@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4FE08640.3060400@codemonkey.ws>
References: <87r4tchcmo.fsf@elfo.mitica> <8762anl84w.fsf@elfo.mitica>
	<4FE08640.3060400@codemonkey.ws>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for Tuesday, June 19th
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: KVM devel mailing list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, Isaku Yamahata <yamahata@valinux.co.jp>, quintela@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Orit Wasserman <owasserm@redhat.com>, Michael Roth <mdroth@us.ibm.com>

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 09:01:36 -0500
Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws> wrote:

> I'm not at all convinced that postcopy is a good idea.  There needs a clear 
> expression of what the value proposition is that's backed by benchmarks.  Those 
> benchmarks need to include latency measurements of downtime which so far, I've 
> not seen.
> 
> I don't want to take any postcopy patches until this discussion happens.

FWIW:

I rather see postcopy as a way of migrating guests forcibly and I know
a service in which such a way is needed: emergency migration.  There is
also a product which does live migration when some hardware problems are
detected (as a semi-FT solution) -- in such cases, we cannot wait until
the guest becomes calm.

Although I am not certain whether QEMU can be used for such products,
it may be worth thinking about.

Thanks,
	Takuya