From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Kxmpg-0002PZ-5E
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 05 Nov 2008 13:10:20 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Kxmpd-0002Ov-CL
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 05 Nov 2008 13:10:19 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=37256 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Kxmpd-0002Op-8o
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 05 Nov 2008 13:10:17 -0500
Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:53395 helo=ciao.gmane.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <gceq-qemu-devel@m.gmane.org>)
	id 1Kxmpc-0004QW-RB
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 05 Nov 2008 13:10:17 -0500
Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KxmpZ-00063R-8f
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:10:13 +0000
Received: from rrcs-71-41-149-67.sw.biz.rr.com ([71.41.149.67])
	by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
	id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:10:13 +0000
Received: from Charles_Duffy by rrcs-71-41-149-67.sw.biz.rr.com with local
	(Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:10:13 +0000
From: Charles Duffy <Charles_Duffy@messageone.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2008 12:10:04 -0600
Message-ID: <gesnht$c54$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <geqq17$om7$1@ger.gmane.org>	<49113157.3090101@codemonkey.ws>	<4911514C.1070300@redhat.com>	<4911A934.9040007@codemonkey.ws>	<20081105141901.GL25523@redhat.com>
	<4911B7D2.2050304@codemonkey.ws>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <4911B7D2.2050304@codemonkey.ws>
Sender: news <news@ger.gmane.org>
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: Live migration - exec: support to be reintroduced?
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> This isn't for snapshotting, so checkpointing of storage is unneccessary.
>> This is just straight save+restore, akin to hibernate-to-disk for a 
>> physical machine.   
> 
> This is a fundamentally broken concept.  You cannot just save the 
> guest's memory state without saving the current state of the storage.

You're requiring the user to manage storage checkpointing themselves in 
this case -- but whether they're using LVM snapshotting or replacing the 
qcow2 backend with an empty file backed by the old store, the user may 
choose to do that themselves rather than pushing the work off to qemu 
(and forcing everything to be stored in a single file); I use (and wish 
not to lose) this functionality myself.