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

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] implement BOOT_TIMEOUT



On 04/14/2011 04:21 AM, Alexander Todorov wrote:
> I will rework the patch with your comments and post it again but was
> wondering about something more advanced.
> 
> Is it possible to specify the order(and timeouts) in which individual
> guests are started? As it seems currently this is not possible.

I'm not sure of any way to do this short of naming your guests so that
their names are sorted in the order you want them started.

Hmm, thinking back to an earlier proposal, this might be a good fit for
the idea of VM groups:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2011-March/msg01546.html

That is, if you can teach libvirt to manage the notion of groups of
related VMs, then you can also express ordering contraints within each
group.

> I've come across a situation where one of the guests needs to start
> first (provides a database) and then another guests needs to start
> second (an app server). The reason is that this is a proprietary app
> which is badly written and fails to connect/re-connect to the database
> if it is not online in the first place.

Without more code on the libvirt front, I think you're stuck renaming
the guests to enforce naming order (assuming that libvirt even goes by
sorted name order, as opposed to readdir() order where you have no control).

-- 
Eric Blake   eblake redhat com    +1-801-349-2682
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


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