Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Live migration

Live migration is a fundamental technique in virtualization technology that enables the transfer of a running (VM) from one physical host to another with minimal or no perceptible , ensuring continuous operation of the VM's operating system, applications, and connected services. This process involves coordinating the migration of the VM's CPU state, contents, connections, and access across hosts, typically over a high-speed , to maintain service availability during resource reallocation or maintenance. The concept of live migration emerged in the early 2000s as platforms matured, with introducing the commercial vMotion feature in 2003 as part of ESX Server, initially focusing on memory and device state transfer while requiring shared storage. In the open-source domain, it was pioneered in the through a 2005 implementation that demonstrated practical downtimes as low as 60 milliseconds for interactive workloads like web servers and games. Subsequent adoption in platforms such as KVM (since 2007) and expanded its use, integrating it into broader ecosystem tools for cloud and enterprise environments. Live migration plays a critical role in modern data centers and by facilitating load balancing across hosts to optimize resource utilization, proactive fault tolerance to avoid failures, through consolidation on fewer servers, and non-disruptive maintenance for hardware upgrades without service interruptions. These benefits have driven its evolution, with performance metrics emphasizing total migration time, (often under 1 second), and data transfer volume as key indicators of efficiency. At its core, live migration relies on techniques like pre-copy, the original and most common method, which iteratively copies dirty memory pages from source to destination while the VM runs, culminating in a short stop-and-copy phase for final state synchronization. Alternatives include post-copy, which resumes the VM on the destination after transferring only the CPU state and fetches remaining memory pages on-demand to reduce total data sent, and hybrid approaches that combine both for balanced performance in varied workloads. Advancements such as memory compression, deduplication, and context-aware page selection continue to minimize overhead. Recent developments as of 2025 include machine learning frameworks for predicting and optimizing migration performance to minimize service level objective violations, and enhancements to Hyper-V live migration in Windows Server 2025 for improved efficiency and GPU support. These make live migration essential for scalable, resilient virtualized infrastructures.

Overview and Fundamentals

Definition and Principles

Live migration is the process of transferring a running , such as a (VM), from one physical host to another with minimal or zero , thereby maintaining continuous service availability and operational continuity. This capability is essential in virtualized environments for tasks like load balancing, hardware maintenance, and without perceptible interruption to users or applications. At its foundation, live migration presupposes technologies, in which a —a software layer—partitions physical resources to host multiple isolated guest operating systems (OSes), each running within a VM on top of the host OS. The workload must be actively executing on the source , with prerequisites including compatible architectures between source and , as well as shared to ensure seamless access to disks and peripherals during the transfer. The core principles of live migration revolve around iterative data transfer of the 's memory pages, CPU registers, and device states while the workload remains operational, coupled with mechanisms for tracking "dirty" pages—those modified since the last transfer—to iteratively copy changes and converge on a consistent state. Coordination between the source and target hosts is achieved through network protocols like TCP/IP, enabling synchronized handshakes that validate resource availability and commit the migration only upon successful preparation. Techniques broadly fall into pre-copy and post-copy categories, where pre-copy emphasizes upfront memory replication and post-copy prioritizes resuming execution before full transfer. Live migration is distinct from cold migration, which necessitates shutting down the prior to , incurring complete as the entire is copied in a static manner. It also contrasts with checkpointing, a technique for periodically suspending and saving workload states to enable recovery or snapshots, whereas live migration sustains uninterrupted execution throughout the process by avoiding full suspensions.

Benefits and Applications

Live migration provides significant advantages in virtualized environments by enabling the seamless relocation of running virtual machines (VMs) between physical hosts with minimal interruption to ongoing operations. One primary benefit is zero-downtime maintenance, which allows administrators to perform hardware upgrades, software patches, or host decommissioning without halting critical services, thereby ensuring continuous availability for applications such as web servers or databases. This is particularly valuable in enterprise settings where unplanned outages can lead to substantial financial losses, with studies indicating that live migration can reduce such disruptions to sub-second levels, often achieving downtimes as low as 60 milliseconds for interactive workloads like game servers. Another key advantage is load balancing across hosts in clustered or environments, where can be dynamically redistributed to prevent hotspots and optimize resource utilization, improving overall system performance and responsiveness. is further enhanced through mechanisms, such as evacuating from failing hardware to healthy nodes, which mitigates risks of service interruptions during component failures and supports by relocating workloads to remote or backup sites. represents a critical benefit, as consolidating multiple idle or lightly loaded onto fewer hosts allows underutilized servers to be powered down, addressing the issue that idle servers often consume up to 70% of their peak power; this consolidation can lead to notable reductions in and operational costs. In practical applications, live migration facilitates server maintenance in large-scale data centers by enabling routine updates without affecting user access, while also supporting dynamic in computing clusters to adapt to fluctuating demands in . It plays a vital role in scenarios, where can be rapidly moved to geographically distributed facilities to restore operations following events like natural disasters or site-wide outages. Additionally, in environments, it enables seamless workload mobility, allowing to shift closer to end-users or data sources for reduced . Quantitatively, advanced live migration systems achieve typical downtimes in the range of 100-210 milliseconds, far surpassing traditional shutdown-and-restart methods that can take minutes and violate service-level agreements (s). By minimizing these interruptions, live migration improves compliance, such as maintaining performance thresholds during load spikes through proactive VM relocation, and helps reduce outage-related costs in enterprise IT, where even brief disruptions can amount to thousands of dollars per minute. On a broader scale, it underpins elastic computing by allowing scalable resource provisioning that matches workload variations, fostering efficient infrastructures. Furthermore, its contribution to green IT initiatives is evident in enabling host powering down after consolidation, which lowers carbon footprints and aligns with goals in modern data centers.

Historical Development

Origins in Virtualization

The concept of live migration traces its roots to early research on process migration in operating systems, which emerged in the 1970s and gained prominence through experiments in environments. A seminal example is the Sprite operating system developed at UC Berkeley in the late 1980s, which implemented transparent process migration to enable load balancing across networked workstations by allowing executing processes to move between hosts at any time without user intervention. These efforts laid foundational ideas for relocating running computations, though they were limited to lightweight processes and faced challenges in and transparency on commodity hardware. True live migration of entire virtual machines, however, became feasible only with the maturation of technologies in the 1990s and early 2000s, building on these process migration principles to handle full system states including memory, CPU, and devices. Key origins of live VM migration are tied to the development of paravirtualized hypervisors in academic and industry settings around 2003-2004. At the , researchers working on the —a freely available virtual machine monitor for x86 —pioneered pre-copy migration techniques to relocate running between physical machines for load balancing and maintenance, with initial implementations developed around 2004-2005 and presented in a 2005 paper. Contemporaneously, introduced VMotion in 2003 as part of its ESX 2.0 and VirtualCenter suite, enabling seamless live transfer of VM workloads across hosts in clustered environments to minimize during hardware upgrades or resource reallocation. These innovations were motivated by the needs of cluster computing and early data centers, where process migration systems like MOSIX in the 1990s had already demonstrated benefits for supercomputing workloads by dynamically distributing parallel processes across clusters to optimize resource utilization. Influential early work extended these foundations toward . The Remus project, initiated around 2006 at the , adapted live migration mechanisms in to provide asynchronous VM replication, achieving by periodically checkpointing and syncing VM states to a backup host for rapid with minimal performance overhead. Pre-copy emerged as the first practical method for live migration, iteratively copying memory pages while the VM continued executing to ensure low downtime. Technological prerequisites included the advent of hardware-assisted , with Intel's VT-x extensions released in 2005 and AMD's AMD-V in 2006, which facilitated efficient memory introspection and trap handling essential for capturing and transferring VM states without excessive overhead.

Evolution and Key Innovations

The integration of live migration into the () hypervisor in 2007 marked a pivotal mid-2000s milestone, enabling efficient VM transfers in open-source environments through iterative memory copying processes. This built briefly on foundational work in and by extending capabilities to kernel-level acceleration. 's ESX 3.5 in 2007 introduced Storage vMotion, with vSphere 4.0 in 2009 adding refinements and graphical interface enhancements for live relocation of VM disks alongside compute , reducing in setups. Open-source contributions via libvirt, starting with its /KVM driver support around 2008, simplified orchestration of these migrations through standardized APIs and tools for cluster management. introduced live in with in 2009, enabling seamless VM transfers in clustered Windows environments. The 2010s brought technique refinements, including the proposal and early prototyping of post-copy live migration for KVM in 2012, which addressed limitations of pre-copy by switching execution to the destination host early and fetching remaining pages on demand, ideal for bandwidth-constrained or high-dirty-page scenarios. OpenStack's Icehouse release in 2014 enhanced live migration with block-level support and improved pre-copy, with post-copy added in subsequent releases like in 2015. Container technologies advanced similarly, with the CRIU (Checkpoint/Restore In Userspace) tool enabling live migration for and containers from 2014 onward by dumping and restoring process states without full VM overhead. Up to 2025, innovations have targeted specialized workloads and infrastructures. NVIDIA's vGPU software gained production-ready live migration support in 2018, with production support in platforms like 6.7, permitting GPU-accelerated VMs—such as those for training—to relocate seamlessly between hosts with minimal disruption via compatible hypervisors like and KVM. For , low-latency variants have emerged to support networks, employing for rapid service migrations that maintain ultra-reliable connections in mobile or scenarios. These advancements stem from escalating scaling requirements, the proliferation of 5G-enabled deployments demanding sub-millisecond latencies, and standardization initiatives like TOSCA, which from the late has facilitated portable orchestration of cross- migrations through declarative topologies.

Migration Techniques

Pre-copy Approach

The pre-copy approach is a foundational technique for live migration of virtual machines (VMs), involving the iterative transfer of pages from the source host to the target host while the VM remains operational on the source, culminating in a short switchover to minimize to tens of milliseconds. Introduced in early systems, this method prioritizes proactive to reduce the volume of transferred during the final pause, typically achieving downtimes of 60–210 ms for common workloads such as web servers and games. The pre-copy phase commences with a complete copy of the VM's pages to the target host. In subsequent iterations, only dirty pages—those modified by the running VM since the prior copy—are identified and transmitted, tracked via a populated from the hypervisor's shadow page tables that log page modifications. This process repeats in rounds until occurs, wherein the rate of new dirty pages falls below the network's page-copying capacity, ensuring the remaining unsynchronized is minimal. Once is reached or a maximum limit is hit, the stop-and-copy suspends the VM on the source for a brief period (around 60 ms), transfers the residual dirty pages along with the processor (including registers and ), and resumes execution on the . , such as connections and disk I/O, is preserved through driver-level checkpointing, where drivers serialize their internal for transfer and reinitialization at the destination. At its core, the pre-copy relies on a push-based mechanism, where the source host proactively streams pages to the target without on-demand requests, complemented by optional pull elements in some variants for residual pages. To mitigate source host overload and network saturation, dynamic rate-limiting adjusts the transfer bandwidth, beginning at a low threshold (e.g., 50 Mbit/s) and escalating in increments toward an administrator-defined maximum as progress. The dirty page follows a that scans and clears the bitmap per round, often employing pseudo-random ordering to handle clustered modifications efficiently; a representative algorithmic outline is:
while (number of dirty pages > [threshold](/page/Threshold) and iteration count < maximum):
    identify dirty pages using current [bitmap](/page/Bitmap)
    transmit identified pages to target host
    reset bitmap to zero
    enable tracking for new modifications via shadow page tables
    increment [iteration](/page/Iteration) count
This structure ensures iterative refinement of memory state. Pre-copy excels in reliability for memory-intensive VMs, as it preemptively synchronizes the bulk of pages, avoiding prolonged pauses and maintaining application transparency with total migration times on the order of seconds for gigabyte-scale memories. However, its efficacy diminishes with high-dirty-rate workloads, where non-convergence can extend total migration time significantly or inflate downtime beyond 3 seconds in adversarial cases.

Post-copy Approach

In the post-copy approach to live migration, the virtual machine (VM) is suspended at the source host, and only the minimal processor and device state is transferred to the target host before resuming execution there. The remaining pages are then fetched on demand via page faults triggered when the VM accesses unmigrated , allowing the migration to complete in finite time even for VMs with high memory dirtying rates. This method contrasts with iterative pre-copy techniques by prioritizing low over complete upfront, though it introduces potential interruptions from fault resolution. The process begins with a quick copy of the VM's CPU and device states to the target, after which the VM resumes , treating as a temporary backing store for missing pages. Upon a at the target, the traps the access and requests the page from over ; multiple faults can be handled asynchronously to minimize disruption. In implementations like KVM with , the kernel's userfaultfd mechanism registers regions to pause threads on faults and resolve them atomically via calls to . Fault handling relies on traps, such as shadow or pseudo-paging, to intercept accesses and route requests efficiently, with algorithms like adaptive pre-paging using fault hints to prioritize likely-needed pages and reduce network faults to about 21% of the in large workloads. Timeout-based failure recovery involves buffering external communications between checkpoints to allow if the source crashes during transfer. resolution typically incurs low latency, with total around 600 ms to 1 second in optimized setups using dynamic self-ballooning. This approach excels in network-bandwidth-limited environments by transferring only accessed pages. Post-copy offers advantages for large VMs, reducing total migration time compared to pre-copy for write-intensive applications, as fewer unnecessary pages are sent. However, it carries higher risks of guest crashes during prolonged faulting if the source fails, since the VM's state is partially split between hosts. It is particularly suitable for mobile and edge computing scenarios, where quick handovers minimize service disruption in resource-constrained networks.

Hybrid and Advanced Methods

Hybrid methods integrate elements of pre-copy and post-copy techniques to optimize live migration by leveraging the strengths of both: the iterative transfer of pages in pre-copy followed by on-demand fetching in post-copy for residual dirty pages, thereby reducing overall and total migration time for workloads with varying access patterns. This approach begins with pre-copy iterations to synchronize most of the guest , then switches to post-copy mode once the remaining dirty pages fall below a , allowing the to resume execution on the destination host while fetching any missing pages over the network. Such strategies address the issues in pure pre-copy for memory-intensive applications and the potential thrashing in pure post-copy under high fault rates. Advanced variants extend these hybrid principles to non-virtual machine contexts and specialized hardware. Demand migration for containers employs checkpoint-restore mechanisms like CRIU (Checkpoint/Restore In Userspace) to capture and transfer process states on-demand, enabling post-copy-like behavior for lightweight containerized workloads without full VM overhead; this facilitates seamless relocation in container orchestration environments by freezing processes briefly, dumping memory and file descriptors, and restoring them on the target node. Storage-agnostic migration, or live block migration, allows disk state transfer without shared storage by iteratively copying block device contents in parallel with memory migration, using techniques like QEMU's drive-mirror to ensure consistency during the switchover. GPU state transfer in vGPU setups involves tracking and migrating graphics memory dirty pages alongside CPU state, as demonstrated in systems that overlap software-based dirty page tracking to minimize blackout time during live relocation of GPU-accelerated virtual machines. Innovations in hybrid and advanced methods incorporate and hardware accelerations for further efficiency. uses models, such as or regression-based estimators, to forecast dirty page rates from historical access patterns, dynamically adjusting copy iterations or switch thresholds to preemptively minimize transferred data volume. In multi-tenant environments, optimizations coordinate concurrent migrations to avoid , employing scheduling algorithms that prioritize tenant SLOs (Service Level Objectives) by staggering transfers and throttling among co-located machines. techniques via RDMA () enable direct memory registration and transfer without intermediate buffering, reducing CPU overhead and latency in high-bandwidth networks by pinning guest pages for remote access during the pre-copy phase. Evaluation of these methods often focuses on total migration time, downtime, and network utilization, with trade-offs between latency and reliability. The total migration time T in hybrid approaches can be modeled as T = T_{\text{pre}} + T_{\text{post}} + T_{\text{switch}}, where T_{\text{pre}} represents the iterative pre-copy duration (dependent on initial memory size and dirty rate), T_{\text{post}} the on-demand post-copy completion for remaining pages, and T_{\text{switch}} the brief pause for state handoff; this formulation highlights how adaptive switching reduces T compared to pure pre-copy by avoiding prolonged iterations, though it may increase brief latency risks if post-copy faults exceed network capacity. Empirical studies show hybrid methods reducing total time for web server workloads versus pre-copy alone, balancing reliability for critical applications against the potential for higher peak loads during switchover.

Implementations and Platforms

Virtualization Hypervisors

Type 1 hypervisors, which run directly on hardware, have been pivotal in implementing live migration for virtual machines (VMs). , an open-source type 1 hypervisor, natively supports pre-copy live migration since its release in 2004, allowing seamless transfer of running paravirtualized guests between hosts with minimal downtime. Post-copy live migration in is enabled through extensions, as detailed in a 2009 implementation that activates after initial memory transfer to reduce total migration time for memory-intensive workloads. KVM, integrated into the Linux kernel as a type 1 hypervisor, works with QEMU for VM emulation and supports pre-copy live migration since around 2007. Post-copy and hybrid live migration approaches were added later, with post-copy introduced in QEMU 2.5 in 2015, often orchestrated via libvirt for automated management across hosts. Pre-copy remains the default in KVM/QEMU, iteratively copying memory pages while the VM runs, with options to switch to post-copy if convergence stalls, forming a hybrid method. This kernel-level integration enhances efficiency by leveraging Linux scheduling and I/O handling, minimizing overhead during migrations. VMware ESXi, another type 1 , employs vMotion for pre-copy live migration of compute resources, transferring active memory pages to balance loads, while Storage vMotion handles disk files separately; both typically require shared storage for seamless operation without additional downtime. introduced Live Migration in (released 2009), enabling zero-downtime VM transfers using cluster-shared volumes () for concurrent access to shared storage across cluster nodes. Distinct features differentiate these hypervisors in live migration. Xen's requires guest OS modifications for direct communication, resulting in lower overhead—often under 5%—and faster page transfers during pre-copy. KVM achieves container-like efficiency through its native module, allowing to share resources and reducing context-switching costs in migrations. VMware integrates Distributed Resource Scheduler (), which automates vMotion-based migrations to optimize cluster-wide resource utilization based on load metrics. Live migration across these hypervisors demands specific prerequisites for reliability. Hardware compatibility, such as processors from the same vendor and CPU family (e.g., generations), ensures instruction set alignment to avoid feature mismatches during transfers. Network configurations require low-latency links, typically or faster, to minimize page transfer delays, with support optional for multi-target scenarios to broadcast state updates efficiently.

Cloud and Distributed Systems

In cloud environments, live migration is integral to maintaining and enabling seamless infrastructure management at scale. OpenStack's Nova component has supported live migration since its Essex release in 2012, utilizing the scheduler to orchestrate instance movement across compute nodes while supporting hybrid pre-copy and post-copy approaches for minimal downtime. Similarly, (AWS) employs internal live migration for EC2 instances via the Nitro System, introduced in the , to relocate workloads during maintenance or optimization without user interruption. (GCP) leverages live migration in its Compute Engine, drawing from internal systems like Borg and for container orchestration, allowing automatic relocation of virtual machines to healthy hosts during maintenance events. In distributed systems, orchestration platforms extend live migration to containerized and hybrid workloads. Kubernetes facilitates virtual machine migration through plugins like KubeVirt, which enables live transfers of running VMs across nodes, and supports container checkpointing for pods using CRIU since version 1.12 in 2018. promotes workload mobility by allowing schedulers to reassign tasks dynamically across clusters, facilitating relocation without full restarts in large-scale deployments. Building on hypervisors such as KVM, these systems integrate migration into broader resource management for and load balancing. Unique aspects of live migration in these environments include automated triggers and specialized adaptations. For instance, initiates live migrations automatically during auto-scaling events or planned maintenance to redistribute virtual machines based on resource demands. In GCP, while primarily intra-zone, live migration supports maintenance across distributed infrastructure, minimizing disruptions for multi-region setups through underlying . Container-specific implementations, such as Docker Swarm's checkpoint/restore functionality via CRIU, enable live migration of stateful services by capturing and transferring container states between hosts. Scalability is a key strength, with platforms handling massive volumes of migrations. Google Cloud, for example, reported performing thousands of live migrations daily in 2015 to address hardware faults, ensuring zero-downtime updates across global datacenters without impacting customer workloads. This capability underscores how live migration supports elastic, resilient cloud and distributed architectures.

Challenges and Considerations

Technical Limitations

Live migration encounters significant performance bottlenecks primarily due to the interplay between the memory dirtying rate and available network bandwidth. In the pre-copy approach, the writable working set (WWS) of the (VM) continuously modifies pages, requiring iterative transfers until the remaining dirty pages are small enough for a brief stop-and-copy phase. If the dirtying rate exceeds the effective , the process fails to converge, leading to prolonged migration times or abortion, as observed in workloads with high memory modification rates. Seminal evaluations report dirty rates up to 600 pages per second for interactive workloads like game servers, highlighting the sensitivity to application behavior. Additionally, tracking dirty pages via shadow page tables imposes CPU overhead, which can degrade VM under resource-constrained hosts. Network latency further constrains live migration feasibility, particularly over wide-area links, where delays amplify transfer times and increase the risk of non-convergence. Remote Direct Memory Access (RDMA) can mitigate this by enabling zero-copy transfers with sub-microsecond latencies and reduced CPU involvement, but it necessitates specialized hardware like InfiniBand or RoCE-enabled network interface cards on both source and destination hosts. Storage configuration also impacts operational efficiency: with shared storage (e.g., SAN or NAS), only memory and device state are migrated, minimizing downtime; however, non-shared storage requires concurrent disk image transfer, substantially extending migration time—often by factors of 10 or more depending on disk size and I/O throughput. Workload characteristics impose additional dependencies, rendering live migration unsuitable for I/O-intensive or applications without preparatory measures. For instance, exhibit high dirtying rates from frequent writes, potentially requiring quiescing (temporary suspension of I/O) to ensure and bound , as uncontrolled can lead to or excessive spikes. In large-scale clusters, scalability is limited by coordination overhead, including synchronization of multiple and , which can escalate total duration and network load when handling dozens of concurrent operations. Quantitative analysis of performance often relies on approximations for time and . Bounds for total time T_{mig} in pre-copy include a lower bound of overheads + \frac{M}{B} and an upper bound of overheads + 5 \times \frac{M}{B}, where M is the VM and B is the link speed; the dirty page rate significantly influences convergence and total time. is bounded by the stop-and-copy phase plus activation overhead, with examples under 200 ms for 256 s over 100 Mbps links in early implementations, though modern gigabit links further reduce these times. The process typically stops when residual dirty pages fall below a like 50 pages, but prolonged iterations can extend to seconds. These bounds underscore the need for workload profiling to assess viability. As of 2024, challenges persist with AI/ML workloads in exhibiting even higher dirtying rates, addressed by AI-driven optimization schemes.

Security and Reliability Issues

Live migration of virtual machines exposes systems to various security threats, primarily due to the transfer of sensitive and over networks. Man-in-the-middle (MITM) attacks pose a significant risk, where adversaries intercept the migration stream through techniques such as , DNS poisoning, or route hijacking, enabling passive or active manipulation of VM contents. Side-channel attacks further threaten , as attackers co-resident with the target VM can exploit shared resources like caches to leak via timing analysis during or after migration. Untrusted s amplify these , potentially compromising guest integrity if the itself is malicious or exploited, allowing unauthorized access to migrated VM states. As of 2024, cache contention during placement post-migration remains a for side-channel attacks in environments. Reliability issues arise from partial failures that disrupt the migration process, leading to inconsistent VM states. Network drops or destination host crashes during transfer can result in split states between source and destination, causing complete VM loss without recovery, particularly in post-copy approaches where the source no longer retains a full up-to-date copy. Post-copy migration carries a higher fault risk compared to pre-copy, as failures may cause guest hangs or extended downtime if residual dependencies persist on the source. To address such concerns, rollback mechanisms enable recovery by restoring the VM from checkpoints on the source host, using techniques like reverse incremental checkpointing to minimize failover time. Mitigations focus on securing the transfer channel and ensuring system stability. Encryption via (TLS) protects migration streams against interception and tampering, with standards adopted widely since the early in hypervisors like and libvirt. Integrity checks, such as checksums or message authentication codes (MACs) on memory pages, verify data authenticity and detect modifications during transit. Fencing protocols in high-availability clusters prevent split-brain scenarios by isolating failed nodes and ensuring only one instance remains active post-migration. For sensitive workloads, live migration requires protection of data during transfers to avoid breaches. Cloud providers implement auditing trails to log migration events, enabling and in regulated environments.

References

  1. [1]
    [PDF] Live Migration of Virtual Machines - USENIX
    By integrating live OS migration into the Xen virtual ma- chine monitor we enable rapid movement of interactive workloads within clusters and data centers.
  2. [2]
    [PDF] The Design and Evolution of Live Storage Migration in VMware ESX
    Abstract. Live migration enables a running virtual machine to move between two physical hosts with no perceptible interruption in service.
  3. [3]
    Migration - KVM
    KVM currently supports savevm/loadvm and offline or live migration Migration commands are given when in qemu-monitor (Alt-Ctrl-2). Upon successful completion, ...
  4. [4]
    An overview of virtual machine live migration techniques
    A key technology for server virtualization is the live migration of virtual machines (VMs). This technology allows VMs to be moved from one physical host to ...
  5. [5]
    What is live migration? - Red Hat
    Oct 22, 2024 · Live migration is the process of moving a virtual machine (VM) from one host to another without interrupting access to the VM.What Are The Types Of Vm... · The Step-By-Step Process Of... · Why Choose Red Hat To...Missing: introduction | Show results with:introduction<|separator|>
  6. [6]
    What is Virtualization? - Cloud Computing Virtualization Explained
    Virtualization is technology that you can use to create virtual representations of servers, storage, networks, and other physical machines.
  7. [7]
    What is a Hypervisor? - VMware
    A hypervisor, also known as a virtual machine monitor or VMM, is software that creates and runs virtual machines (VMs).
  8. [8]
  9. [9]
    [PDF] Containers checkpointing and live migration
    Jul 23, 2008 · Checkpointing itself is used for live migration, in partic- ular for implementing high-availability solutions. In this paper, we present the ...
  10. [10]
    None
    ### Extracted and Summarized Content from https://www.usenix.org/event/nsdi05/tech/full_papers/clark/clark.pdf
  11. [11]
  12. [12]
    [PDF] Cost-Aware Live Migration of Services in the Cloud - USENIX
    Clearly, live migration has an advantage of keep- ing the service's availability with only a short period of service downtime.Missing: disaster recovery
  13. [13]
    Process migration | ACM Computing Surveys - ACM Digital Library
    Process migration is the act of transferring a process between two machines, enabling dynamic load distribution and fault resilience.
  14. [14]
    [PDF] Process Migration in the Sprite Operating System - UC Berkeley EECS
    Feb 11, 1987 · In contrast, Sprite's process migration mechanism allows processes to be moved at any time. If a process is migrated to a node and then the ...Missing: roots | Show results with:roots
  15. [15]
    [PDF] High Availability via Asynchronous Virtual Machine Replication
    In live migration, guest memory is iteratively copied over a number of rounds and may consume minutes of execution time; the brief service interruption caused ...
  16. [16]
    [PDF] kvm: the Linux Virtual Machine Monitor
    Jun 30, 2007 · Live migration is an iterative process: as each pass copies memory to the remote host, the guest generates more memory to copy. In order to ...
  17. [17]
    Under the Covers with Storage vMotion - VMware vSphere Blog
    Mar 23, 2011 · In VI 3.5 it was officially given the name Storage vMotion, but only had CLI support. GUI support was finally added in 4.0 and with 4.1 ...
  18. [18]
    libvirt releases
    ... support things like live migration of guests with vfio-assigned devices. It can currently be used by: setting managed='no' in the XML configuration for the ...
  19. [19]
    KVM Post Copy Live Migration with Kernel RDMA transport
    Jan 9, 2012 · We present the design, implementation, and evaluation of post-copy based live migration for virtual machines (VMs) across a Gigabit LAN.
  20. [20]
    OpenStack Icehouse: IT'S ALIVE! – live migration, that is - The Register
    The "Keystone" identity service has been given a major series of upgrades to make it easier to use a single credential across hybrid OpenSack ...
  21. [21]
    Live migration - CRIU
    Jan 12, 2023 · Live migration attempts to provide a seamless transfer of service between physical machines without impacting client processes or applications.Missing: LXC 2014
  22. [22]
    Live virtual machine migration: A survey, research challenges, and ...
    The advent of VM migration technology resolves server overutilization and performance degradation problems by enabling the migration of VMs between the servers ...
  23. [23]
    Live migration of trans-cloud applications - ScienceDirect.com
    This paper presents a solution for the component-wise migration of cloud applications. The migration is performed component-wise.
  24. [24]
    [PDF] Live Migration of Virtual Machines
    We achieve this by using a pre-copy approach in which pages of memory are iteratively copied from the source machine to the destination host, all without ever ...Missing: seminal | Show results with:seminal
  25. [25]
  26. [26]
    Features/PostCopyLiveMigration - QEMU
    A postcopy implementation that allows migration of guests that have large page change rates (relative to the available bandwidth) to be migrated in a finite ...Beginning · 4Summary · 6How to use · 8Design
  27. [27]
    An intelligent model for supporting edge migration for virtual function ...
    Jan 19, 2023 · Live migrations can be categorized in two categories: pre-copy and post-copy. figure a. Pre-copy migration models (Fig. 5) took ...
  28. [28]
    Dynamic Hybrid-copy Live Virtual Machine Migration - ScienceDirect
    Pre-copy, Post-copy, and Hybrid-copy are examples of Live VM migration methods that copy the VM's memory states to the destination host, while the VM still ...
  29. [29]
    [PDF] MigrOS: Transparent Live-Migration Support for Containerised ...
    Jul 16, 2021 · CRIU is a software framework for transparent checkpoint- ing and restoring of Linux processes [13]. It enables live migration, snapshots, or ...
  30. [30]
    Features/LiveBlockMigration - QEMU
    Oct 11, 2016 · Live block migration in QEMU involves copying a virtual disk while the VM runs, with pre-copy (live copy then migration) or post-copy (live ...
  31. [31]
  32. [32]
    Machine Learning Based Statistical Prediction Model for Improving ...
    Apr 10, 2016 · Total migration time, downtime, and forecasting dirty pages are performance parameters of our live migration system. Experiments 1 and 2 are ...
  33. [33]
    [PDF] Evaluating Multi-Tenant Live Migrations Effects on Performance - HAL
    Sep 9, 2018 · Live migrations can be used to ensure such kind of optimization. ... ticity in shared storage databases for the cloud using live data migration.<|separator|>
  34. [34]
    [PDF] Zero-Copy, Minimal-Blackout Virtual Machine Migrations Using ...
    We propose a new live-migration paradigm for virtual machines called zero-copy migration. By making the working set of the virtual machine available on the ...
  35. [35]
    (PDF) Dynamic Hybrid-copy Live Virtual Machine Migration
    Oct 30, 2025 · In this paper, we present the mathematical model for the Dynamic Hybrid-copy live migration method for the total migration time, downtime, and ...Missing: formula | Show results with:formula
  36. [36]
    [PDF] Users' manual - Xen Project Wiki
    Virtual machines with performance close to native hardware. • Live migration of running virtual machines between physical hosts.
  37. [37]
    [PDF] Post-Copy Live Migration of Virtual Machines - Kartik Gopalan
    ABSTRACT 1. We present the design, implementation, and evaluation of post-copy based live migration for virtual machines (VMs) across a Gigabit LAN.Missing: URL | Show results with:URL
  38. [38]
    Live Migrating QEMU-KVM Virtual Machines - Red Hat Developer
    Mar 24, 2015 · This discussion will go through the simple design from the early days of live migration in the QEMU/KVM hypervisor, how it has been tweaked and optimized.
  39. [39]
    What is KVM? - Red Hat
    Nov 1, 2024 · With KVM, a VM is a Linux process, scheduled and managed by the kernel. VMs running with KVM benefit from the performance features of Linux, and ...
  40. [40]
    What is Migration with Storage vMotion - TechDocs
    With Storage vMotion, you can migrate a virtual machine and its disk files from one datastore to another while the virtual machine is running.
  41. [41]
    The vMotion Process Under the Hood - VMware Blogs
    Jul 9, 2019 · A migration specification is created that contains the following information: The virtual machine that is being live-migrated; Configuration of ...Vmotion Process · Page Tracing · Iterative Memory Pre-Copy
  42. [42]
    Live Migration Overview | Microsoft Learn
    Sep 17, 2020 · Live migration is a Hyper-V feature in Windows Server. It allows you to transparently move running Virtual Machines from one Hyper-V host to another without ...
  43. [43]
    VMware DRS Overview: Optimizing Resource Allocation in vSphere ...
    Sep 10, 2025 · If DRS detects a resource imbalance, it triggers a live migration (vMotion) to balance the load across the cluster. This migration occurs ...
  44. [44]
    Hyper-V Live Migration compability CPU - Microsoft Q&A
    Apr 18, 2024 · Live Migration only requires processors from the same manufacturer. Common requirements for any form of live migration: Two (or more) servers ...Missing: family low- latency multicast
  45. [45]
    [PDF] Live Migration of Direct-Access Devices - cs.wisc.edu
    In this paper, we describe a lightweight software mech- anism for migrating virtual machines with direct hardware access. We base our solution on shadow drivers ...Missing: history | Show results with:history
  46. [46]
    Live migration process during maintenance events | Compute Engine
    Live migration lets Google Cloud perform maintenance without interrupting a workload, rebooting an instance, or modifying any of the instance's properties, such ...
  47. [47]
    Live Migration - KubeVirt user guide
    Live migration moves a running VM to another node while the workload continues, only copying the instance memory.Missing: Volcano CRIU 2018
  48. [48]
    Running Workloads in Mesos
    Workloads in Mesos are launched by schedulers, the basic unit is a task, and task groups are grouped into single workloads. Task groups can be single or ...Missing: mobility live migration
  49. [49]
    Maintenance and updates - Azure Virtual Machines - Microsoft Learn
    Aug 22, 2024 · Live migration is not a guaranteed operation. The Azure platform triggers live migration in the following scenarios: Planned maintenance ...Maintenance Configurations · Scheduled Events for Linux · Scheduled EventsMissing: auto- | Show results with:auto-
  50. [50]
    Google Compute Engine uses Live Migration technology to service ...
    Mar 3, 2015 · Our goal for live migration is to keep hardware and software updated across all our datacenters without restarting customers' VMs.
  51. [51]
    Accelerate Service Live Migration in Resource-limited Edge ...
    Nov 9, 2019 · For example, a YOLO-v3 object detection application [1] can modify up to 1GB memory in 100ms, which will result in non-convergence when ...
  52. [52]
    [PDF] Predicting the Performance of Virtual Machine Migration
    Page dirty rate is the rate at which memory pages in the. VM are modified which, in turn, directly affects the number of pages that are transferred in each pre- ...
  53. [53]
    [PDF] High Performance Virtual Machine Migration with RDMA over ...
    Zero-copy approach requires registering the memory pages that belong to a foreign VM, which is not currently supported by the InfiniBand driver for security ...
  54. [54]
    [PDF] “Cut Me Some Slack”: Latency-Aware Live Migration for Databases
    If the server workload increases, the previous throt- tling speed may exceed the new level of slack, while if the server workload decreases, the migration may ...Missing: unsuitable | Show results with:unsuitable
  55. [55]
    VC-Migration: Live Migration of Virtual Clusters in the Cloud
    This paper investigates various live migration strategies for virtual clusters (VC). We first describe a framework VC-Migration to control the migration of ...
  56. [56]
    [PDF] Secure Live Virtual Machine Migration through Runtime Monitors
    Active Manipulation: A type of the “Man in The. Middle” attack, where the attacker can manipulate the memory of the migrated VM while being transferred across ...
  57. [57]
    [PDF] Recovering a Virtual Machine after Failure of Post-Copy Live Migration
    The traditional way of achieving fault tolerance via check- pointing is an active-passive approach [7], [27], [39] where the backup node gets the control once ...
  58. [58]
    Migration encryption - oVirt
    A user can enable encrypted migration for a cluster in Engine and then libvirt is asked to perform native QEMU TLS migrations when migrating VMs between hosts.
  59. [59]
    Chapter 13. Live migration | OpenShift Container Platform | 4.12
    By default, live migration traffic is encrypted using Transport Layer Security (TLS). 13.1.2. Additional resources.
  60. [60]
    A Survey on Techniques of Secure Live Migration of Virtual Machine
    Live migration facilitates workload balancing, fault tolerance, online system maintenance, consolidation of virtual machines etc. Unfortunately the disclosed ...Missing: mitigations fencing
  61. [61]
    [PDF] VCS 6.2 I/O Fencing Deployment Considerations - Veritas Vox
    Membership arbitration with I/O Fencing protects against such split brain conditions. ... customers use the `hagrp -migrate` command to live migrate an ...
  62. [62]
    Healthcare Data Migration: All You Need to Know
    Feb 9, 2025 · Enable detailed audit logging & monitoring; Align migration with HIPAA, GDPR, and local laws. 3. Data Integrity & Loss Risks. Even a small data ...Missing: VM | Show results with:VM