[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-users] Live migration: 2500ms downtime
- To: "Luciano Rocha" <strange@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- From: "Marconi Rivello" <marconirivello@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 00:57:48 -0300
- Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 20:58:17 -0700
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=CV7GYXlxFuMzEcctkJyRXR1ma+/Bbu2lBksmXj+5NGQtiKIi+HZYeRbg4SDRb+S6B6HLK5GXVEClq+q+k3a8vd9WaSzBPOJ8k2lvSgzXV9IORSVzLvyKlHN4pDhqOi2IhrzWTJ2SOlpg3j15oHI0waM4QsSApv/Fm7GOxT9Kz10=
- List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>
On 8/10/07, Luciano Rocha <strange@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 02:18:53PM -0300, Marconi Rivello wrote:
> Hi, Luciano.
>
> On 8/10/07, Luciano Rocha <strange@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 12:42:08PM -0300, Marconi Rivello wrote:
> > > Another issue that I described on a previous email (which,
> > unfortunately,
> > > didn't get any replies) is that this downtime increases to more than 20
> > > seconds if I set the domU's memory to 512MB (the maxmem set is 1024MB).
> > I
> > > repeated the test successively, from one side to the other, with mem set
> > to
> > > 512 and 1024, and the result was always the same. Around 3s with mem =
> > > maxmem, and around 24s with mem=512 and maxmem=1024.
> > >
> >
> > You are using the option --live to migrate, aren't you?
>
>
> Yes, I am. :)
Oh. Well, then, could you try without? :)
I could, but what I'm whining :) about is to have a period of unresponsiveness of a couple of seconds, instead of a tenth of a second. If I do a stop-copy-restart migration it will be even longer.
Also, try the reverse. Ping an outside host in the domU.
I will. In fact, I will try all the monitoring suggestions (from you and the others). Inside domU, outside, third machine, ICMP, ARP...
> Even if I weren't, it would make sense to expect a lower downtime (or the
> same downtime) by reducing the domU memory. But it takes longer if I reduce
> the domU's memory.
That is odd. Is the Dom0 memory the same (ie., fixed)?
> Would you happen to have any ideas on why it behaves like that?
No idea. I might expect a longer migration time for a machine with a
very active working set, but not a much longer downtime. That should be
only a freeze, final sync, and resume on the other side.
--
lfr
0/0
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
I would like to thank everyone who contributed with ideas. It was very helpful. Unfortunately, I will be gone for the next week on a training, and will only be able to further investigate when I get back to work. When I do, I will do some more tests and post what I find out or not.
Thanks again,
Marconi.
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
|
