[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] KVM processes -- should we be able to attach them to the libvirtd process?

Hugh O. Brock schrieb:
Not too long ago we took a patch that allowed QEMU VMs to keep running
even if libvirtd died or was restarted.

I was talking to Matt Farellee (cc'd) this afternoon about
manageability, and he feels fairly strongly that this behavior should be
optional -- in other words, it should be possible to guarantee that if
libvirtd dies, it will take all the VMs with the "die-with-libvirtd"
flag set down with it.

I'm not sure this API is portable to Xen, but it would work on any
hypervisor that represents the VM as a normal process.

Does this strike anyone else as useful behavior?


From my point of view the kvm-processes should under no circumstance die if it is not intended that they behave so.
i.e. one most shut down a VM or destroy it on purpose.
A normale restart of libvirt should do nothing but restart the libvirt.
Your mentiond behaviour would also make it impossible to update/upgrade libvirt without restarting all VMs.

Kind regards, Gerrit Slomma

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]