XCP-ng
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Not a real issue, just looking for some knowledge ...

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Xen Orchestra
    4 Posts 2 Posters 395 Views 2 Watching
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • J Offline
      jcdick1
      last edited by jcdick1

      I have a VM that has a GPU assigned via PCIe passthrough, with its disk on an NFS SR. I understand why I can't live migrate a VM that utilizes PCIe passthrough.

      But what is it that prevents migrating just the virtual disk to the local SR on the host running that VM?

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • olivierlambertO Offline
        olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
        last edited by

        I think the XAPI logic is fairly simple: as soon you are using PCI passthrough, no migration is possible (despite same host should work). Probably a use case not taken in consideration I suppose 🙂

        J 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • J Offline
          jcdick1 @olivierlambert
          last edited by jcdick1

          @olivierlambert Fair enough. I will bring the disk for this VM onto the local SR for patching and rebooting my file server that hosts the NFS SR, just to be on the safe side.

          I was hoping I could minimize the downtime by live-migrating the disk onto the host running it, but get the same error about PCI hardware as if I were trying to migrate the whole VM to another host.

          But as far as you know, there is no technical reason for why it wouldn't work, like there is for live-migrating between hosts with passed-through hardware.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • olivierlambertO Offline
            olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
            last edited by

            I agree, I don't think it's a technical limitation, just a use case not "covered" 🙂

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • First post
              Last post