CrossPoolMigrationv1: Difference between revisions
From Xen
Jump to navigationJump to search
Lars.kurth (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
Lars.kurth (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{TODO|Has this been implemented? If so, it should be moved to Designs in the XAPI Devel Index}} |
|||
<!-- MoinMoin name: CrossPoolMigrationV2 --> |
|||
<!-- Comment: --> |
|||
<!-- WikiMedia name: CrossPoolMigrationV2 --> |
|||
<!-- Page revision: 00000005 --> |
|||
<!-- Original date: Mon Jul 18 15:23:07 2011 (1311002587000000) --> |
|||
__NOTOC__ |
|||
This page describes a possible design for [[CrossPoolMigration|Cross-pool migration]] (which also works for within-pool migration with and without shared storage). |
This page describes a possible design for [[CrossPoolMigration|Cross-pool migration]] (which also works for within-pool migration with and without shared storage). |
||
| Line 78: | Line 73: | ||
|} |
|} |
||
[[Category: |
[[Category:XAPI Devel]] |
||
[[Category:Developers]] |
|||
Latest revision as of 13:01, 11 July 2013
|
To Do:
Has this been implemented? If so, it should be moved to Designs in the XAPI Devel Index |
This page describes a possible design for Cross-pool migration (which also works for within-pool migration with and without shared storage).
This is an alternative design to CrossPoolMigrationv2 and CrossPoolMigrationv3
This design has the following features:
- DRBD is used to replicate disks on demand
- this is storage-format agnostic: it doesn't require .vhd
- the SM on one host can generate URIs which can be used by other SMs to bootstrap the disk mirroring process
- a single codepath is used in xapi, making testing easier
- this replaces the existing migration API
- a simple RESTful API makes the whole thing quite easy to test, prod etc.
- the xapi pieces and the SM pieces can be developed and tested independently and integrated at the end
Pros/Cons of DRBD vs snapshot/copy
- Pro: by separating storage replication from memory transfer we can switch easily to "libxl" without modifications. Otherwise we would need callbacks from libxl to synchronise the disk copy with the memory copy.
- Pro: we don't need to write a snapshot/copy loop
- Con: we do need to write something to manage a drbd instance, which may be on a shared host (eg vanilla Debian dom0)
- Pro: migration downtime is expected to be lower, since replication cost is spread over each I/O request, rather than being bursty
- Con: continuous replication might slow down some workloads more than snapshot/copy
- Con: DRBD is linux only: it's not clear how this would work with (eg) a FreeBSD storage driver domain.
Component diagram
Migration sequence
Proposed milestones and task list
The following milestones are proposed:
| Milestone number |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
The following tasks are proposed:
| Task | Status |
| Create sample drbd.conf files | Completed |
| Implement a DRBD service in dom0 | In progress |
| Implement xapi HTTP operations | |
| Implement SMAPI VDI.replicate_to, VDI.get_replication_target | |
| Implement xapi HTTP heartbeat | |
| Implement XenAPI VM.migrate, VM.receive |
