Jamie Lokier wrote: > Avi Kivity wrote: > >> (logically we would copy all of the data of all block devices, but >> that's not very practical, so we assume shared storage). >> > > Speaking of that, if the guest RAM were a memory-mapped file, couldn't > that use shared storage too? > >
You would need a clustered filesystem that supports coherent mmap()s. > You'd have to be careful: it would need a distributed filesystem with > coherent mappings (i.e. not NFS), but they do exist. > > I'm guessing that the bulk of time spent in migration/checkpointing is > saving the RAM image. Using a memory-mapped file on shared storage > for RAM might make that faster. (Or slower!). > The memory needs to be transferred anyway, so total time would not change. You could start running on the target sooner, though. -- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
