[libvirt] KVM processes -- should we be able to attach them to the libvirtd process?

Gerrit Slomma roadrunner_gs at web.de
Wed May 6 18:26:29 UTC 2009

Hugh O. Brock schrieb:
> Not too long ago we took a patch that allowed QEMU VMs to keep running
> even if libvirtd died or was restarted.
> I was talking to Matt Farellee (cc'd) this afternoon about
> manageability, and he feels fairly strongly that this behavior should be
> optional -- in other words, it should be possible to guarantee that if
> libvirtd dies, it will take all the VMs with the "die-with-libvirtd"
> flag set down with it.
> I'm not sure this API is portable to Xen, but it would work on any
> hypervisor that represents the VM as a normal process.
> Does this strike anyone else as useful behavior?
> Thanks,
> --Hugh

 From my point of view the kvm-processes should under no circumstance 
die if it is not intended that they behave so.
i.e. one most shut down a VM or destroy it on purpose.
A normale restart of libvirt should do nothing but restart the libvirt.
Your mentiond behaviour would also make it impossible to update/upgrade 
libvirt without restarting all VMs.

Kind regards, Gerrit Slomma

More information about the libvir-list mailing list