RE: [Xen-devel] Should "xm restore" be able to create two domains with the same name?

["Petersson, Mats" <Mats.Petersson@xxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Petersson, Mats 
> Sent: 22 May 2007 13:03
> To: Petersson, Mats; 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: 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". 

I think I've found the place in XendDomainInfo.py and the fix... Testing
it right now. 

--
Mats
> 
> --
> 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