Xen project Mailing List

RE: [Xen-users] Re: Access Hypervisor Control from DomU

To: "XEN User - listmembers" <xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

From: "John Cianfarani" <jcianfarani@xxxxxxxxxx>

Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 01:33:13 -0500

Cc: Stephan Seitz <s.seitz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

Delivery-date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 06:37:05 +0000

Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=rogers.com; h=Received:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-class:Date:Message-ID:X-MimeOLE:X-MS-Has-Attach:X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:Thread-Topic:thread-index:From:To:Cc; b=srUiWtN76BXZUgKBssjUAloTUTllud3PKy15LEW7BGKIZH1lark7B9sVLkYZwW4WaBsaYorft4zjjCnEwLSGBemkuOW3qRMtJaP3afWU3NBnIYUkOUKMPgyBFRYP0ftpPqlmlanz9CwsMsB61wMegN5qD/lZ0C7m6cm6sdEqNsA= ;

List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>

Thread-index: AcZUL/9UlPuU43tiRp+oOq7PTc7y/AAXK2cQ

Thread-topic: [Xen-users] Re: Access Hypervisor Control from DomU

Look into using heartbeat with DRBD failover would probably be less than a few second hit. Data would also be safe :) This is better than trying to migrate a domU after the box has died... Thanks John -----Original Message----- From: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Stephan Seitz Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 2:26 PM To: XEN User - listmembers Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Re: Access Hypervisor Control from DomU -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 John Smith schrieb: > Nils Toedtmann wrote: >> >> >> I remember reading that the only real difference between a dom0 >> and a domU kernel is the priviledge to have access to the >> hypervisor. Why not declaring a special domU to a "fallback" >> dom0? Not in the sense of having access to hw but control over >> the hypervisor. >> >> That would help if the original dom0 userland dies, but it's >> kernel keeps forwarding/bridging packets and blockdevice-I/O, >> like Stephan's dom0 did. >> >> /nils. >> Thanks for this hint, Nils. I'll try to setup another test system with two dom0's, just to see if this is possible. I'll post results if this leads to a running system. > Hi, > > if this would be a problem you would have to deal with in the real > world, you would have a identical box on another location and move > the domU's to it and reboot the problem box. > > Sincerely, > > Jan. This was my first thought, but we didn't setup a fallback system (the one, i talked about, is just for testing purposes installed). Also, this machine has all it's filesystems on local disk, so a domU migration would last longer than driving to the colo. For live systems, i would also prefer this scenario, but i think this is not managable without the use of a NAS/SAN. Greetings Stephan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFELDDSsU1z66G/Ui4RAu9EAKCMWclUJReeM5WGRBaS05HrQmK10wCfRtQL RHIjP0k/dy9ZxHaq3LwU4DQ= =kTZE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users

©2013 Xen Project, A Linux Foundation Collaborative Project. All Rights Reserved.
Linux Foundation is a registered trademark of The Linux Foundation.
Xen Project is a trademark of The Linux Foundation.