[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: [Xen-devel] Should "xm restore" be able to create two domains with the same name?
> -----Original Message----- > From: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of > Petersson, Mats > Sent: 22 May 2007 12:16 > To: Daniel P. Berrange; Keir Fraser > Cc: xen-devel > Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Should "xm restore" be able to > create two domains with the same name? > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Daniel P. Berrange [mailto:berrange@xxxxxxxxxx] > > Sent: 18 May 2007 15:08 > > To: Keir Fraser > > Cc: Petersson, Mats; xen-devel > > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Should "xm restore" be able to > > create two domains with the same name? > > > > On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 02:55:22PM +0100, Keir Fraser wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On 18/5/07 14:49, "Petersson, Mats" > <Mats.Petersson@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > If I do "xm save dom file", followed by "xm restore file; > > xm restore > > > > file", I get two domains with the same name. Surely, > > that's not quite > > > > right? [Particularly since they both will be using the > > same disk-image, > > > > etc]. > > > > > > You shouldn't do that. ;-) > > > > > > The second restore ought to fail when xend (or the hotplug > > scripts) realise > > > that the block device is already in use. > > > > The second restore ought to fail before it gets anywhere > near hotplug > > scripts. XenD should be enforcing name & UUID uniqueness > when creating > > guest VMs. Even 'xm create' lets you start the same guest twice > > > > http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2007-04/msg > > 00279.html > > Do you have any info to bracket back when this was still working? I > don't even really know (for sure) which file(s) to look at [of course, > it's limited to a few files, but all have quote a few changes lately], > since I don't know where this functionality used to be (or where it's > supposed to go). I'll keep looking, but having a "time-limit" for it > working correctly would reduce the number of changesets. The data of > your test is roughly 14800, so it has to be broken before that > changeset. Interestingly, I found that "xm-test" has a test ".../tests/create/04_create_conflictname_neg.py", which supposedly test this behaviour. It seems unchanged for quite some time - so presumably this test is now "failing". -- Mats > > -- > Mats > > > > Dan. > > -- > > |=- Red Hat, Engineering, Emerging Technologies, Boston. +1 > > 978 392 2496 -=| > > |=- Perl modules: http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ > > -=| > > |=- Projects: http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/ > > -=| > > |=- GnuPG: 7D3B9505 F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF > > F742 7D3B 9505 -=| > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel > > > _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |