From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A806D6ACFF
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 09:48:22 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 93DC92F91A
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 09:47:52 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
[212.186.127.180])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 7F75E2F90E
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 09:47:51 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 43A37446DE
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 09:47:51 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2021 09:47:45 +0100
From: Fabian =?iso-8859-1?q?Gr=FCnbichler?= <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
References: <b08a69e25cdfe7615bd192ab07b169a0100fadeb.camel@odiso.com>
<ca2fa17ffd670a60e72071ff401139c104d1e854.camel@odiso.com>
<50ed1cad64907f845b0b545fdebf3af8ede41c7b.camel@odiso.com>
<8cdf4d6536899de1c6a6a43ff7fa21e28ac87331.camel@odiso.com>
In-Reply-To: <8cdf4d6536899de1c6a6a43ff7fa21e28ac87331.camel@odiso.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: astroid/0.15.0 (https://github.com/astroidmail/astroid)
Message-Id: <1611564401.3sjx0tyrat.astroid@nora.none>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL 0.026 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
medium trust
SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] qemu live migration: bigger downtime recently
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>,
<mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>,
<mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2021 08:48:22 -0000
On January 23, 2021 9:38 am, aderumier@odiso.com wrote:
> about qemu version, =20
>=20
> theses vms was started around 6 november, after an update of the qemu
> package the 4 november.
>=20
>=20
> looking at proxmox repo, I think it should be 5.1.0-4 or -5.
>=20
>=20
> pve-qemu-kvm-dbg_5.1.0-4_amd64.deb 29-Oct-2020 17:28 =20
> 75705544
> pve-qemu-kvm-dbg_5.1.0-5_amd64.deb 04-Nov-2020 17:41 =20
> 75737556
> pve-qemu-kvm-dbg_5.1.0-6_amd64.deb 05-Nov-2020 18:08 =20
> 75693264
>=20
>=20
> Could it be a known bug introduced by new backups dirty-bitmap patches,
> and fixed later ? (I see a -6 version one day later)
>=20
pve-qemu-kvm (5.1.0-6) pve; urgency=3Dmedium
* migration/block-dirty-bitmap: avoid telling QEMU that the bitmap migrat=
ion
is active longer than required
-- Proxmox Support Team <support@proxmox.com> Thu, 05 Nov 2020 18:59:40 +=
0100
sound like that could be the case? ;)
=