On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 09:43:44AM +0100, Martin Kletzander wrote: > On 01/30/2013 08:40 PM, Dead Horse wrote: > > The nodes are EL6.3 based. > > > > Currently installed libvirt packages: > > > > libvirt-lock-sanlock-0.9.10-21.el6_3.8.x86_64 > > libvirt-cim-0.6.1-3.el6.x86_64 > > libvirt-0.9.10-21.el6_3.8.x86_64 > > libvirt-python-0.9.10-21.el6_3.8.x86_64 > > libvirt-client-0.9.10-21.el6_3.8.x86_64 > > > > and qemu packages: > > qemu-kvm-0.12.1.2-2.295.el6_3.10.x86_64 > > qemu-kvm-tools-0.12.1.2-2.295.el6_3.10.x86_64 > > qemu-img-0.12.1.2-2.295.el6_3.10.x86_64 > > > > Thus my presumption here given the above is that virDomainMigrateToURI2 has > > not yet been patched and/or back-ported into the EL6.x libvirt/qemu? > > > > virDomainMigrateToURI2 is supported since 0.9.2, but is there a > possibility the code is requesting direct migration? That might explain > the message, which is then incorrect; this was fixed in [1]. > > Martin > > [1] > http://libvirt.org/git/?p=libvirt.git;a=commitdiff;h=3189dfb1636da22d426d2fc07cc9f60304b16c5c
What is "direct migration" exactly, in the context of qemu-kvm? We are using p2p migration http://gerrit.ovirt.org/gitweb?p=vdsm.git;a=blob;f=vdsm/libvirtvm.py;h=fe140ecbfac665248e2ad5c4bfaebaf54ab884cc;hb=18c24f7c7c27ac732c4a760caa9524e7319cd47e#l501 _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
