Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 07:26:58AM +0530, Ligesh wrote:
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 12:57:04AM +0800, Tim Post wrote:
> .. and incremental thereof, on a typical (classic) linux system.
>
> While I agree that lvm snapshots are the easiest way (now), if
> developing something better, shouldn't a smaller option come into play?
>
> I'd rather run a daemon on the guests (or kernel module) named xenbackup
> than have to take a snapshot of every guest that needed a backup.
>
Daemon is a good idea--not for backup though. It should create a PPP over the
serial port, which means we can contact it from the dom0 using the domain name
as the parameter.
xm exec domain-id "command".
It would then connect to this daemon through the serial port, execute and
return the output. THe daemon would be very small with just the functionality
to transfer files and also execute commands and return the output, and you have
to configure init to run it as a compulsory service--though the ideal would be
to have the kernel make sure of that this service is running. Anyway, I think
the problem is that virtualization as such is in a nascent state and maybe in a
couple of years time, someone would implement all of these.
Anyway, what I am trying to say is, mass management of domUs is what will
make the most compelling argument for virtualization.
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
|
Home