On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 10:47:58AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-01-09 at 12:47 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 03:13:25PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > The no_migrate save state flag is currently only checked in the
> > > last phase of migration.
On Sun, 2011-01-09 at 12:47 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 03:13:25PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > The no_migrate save state flag is currently only checked in the
> > last phase of migration. This means that we potentially waste
> > a lot of time and bandwidth with
On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 10:24 +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 03:13:25PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > The no_migrate save state flag is currently only checked in the
> > last phase of migration. This means that we potentially waste
> > a lot of time and bandwidth with
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 03:13:25PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> The no_migrate save state flag is currently only checked in the
> last phase of migration. This means that we potentially waste
> a lot of time and bandwidth with the live state handlers before
> we ever check the no_migrate flags.
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 03:13:25PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> The no_migrate save state flag is currently only checked in the
> last phase of migration. This means that we potentially waste
> a lot of time and bandwidth with the live state handlers before
> we ever check the no_migrate flags.
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 03:13:25PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> The no_migrate save state flag is currently only checked in the
> last phase of migration. This means that we potentially waste
> a lot of time and bandwidth with the live state handlers before
> we ever check the no_migrate flags.
