From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:32954) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bzOkT-00070d-AR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 10:00:10 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bzOkN-00081T-Q5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 10:00:09 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:60374) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bzOkN-00080a-KY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 26 Oct 2016 10:00:03 -0400 Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 14:59:57 +0100 From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" Message-ID: <20161026135957.GF2029@work-vm> References: <1476792613-11712-1-git-send-email-zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com> <1476792613-11712-13-git-send-email-zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com> <20161026055157.GL1679@amit-lp.rh> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161026055157.GL1679@amit-lp.rh> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH COLO-Frame (Base) v21 12/17] COLO: Add 'x-colo-lost-heartbeat' command to trigger failover List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Amit Shah Cc: zhanghailiang , quintela@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, wency@cn.fujitsu.com, lizhijian@cn.fujitsu.com, xiecl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com, Luiz Capitulino , Eric Blake , Markus Armbruster * Amit Shah (amit.shah@redhat.com) wrote: > On (Tue) 18 Oct 2016 [20:10:08], zhanghailiang wrote: > > We leave users to choose whatever heartbeat solution they want, > > if the heartbeat is lost, or other errors they detect, they can use > > experimental command 'x_colo_lost_heartbeat' to tell COLO to do failover, > > COLO will do operations accordingly. > > > > For example, if the command is sent to the PVM, the Primary side will > > exit COLO mode and take over operation. > > Primary should already be in control, so there's nothing special > needed to 'take over operation'? At max, it should not do periodic > syncs anymore till it hears from a (new) secondary. But it has to stop waiting for an ack from the secondary, and stop sending copies of block data to it etc. Dave > > If sent to the Secondary, the > > secondary will run failover work, then take over server operation to > > become the new Primary. > > > > Cc: Luiz Capitulino > > Cc: Eric Blake > > Cc: Markus Armbruster > > Signed-off-by: zhanghailiang > > Signed-off-by: Li Zhijian > > Reviewed-by: Dr. David Alan Gilbert > > Reviewed-by: Amit Shah > > > Amit -- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK