Hot migration or cold?

[aiea96701]

Just curious.   We have some discussion going on as to which type of P2v procedure is the most reliable.   Some of my colleques say COLD.  Others say HOT.   The real issue is that my colleque is saying that the first priority for migrations (P2V) should be COLD....always.   I disagree. I use COLD migrations for special circumstances only.   I use Hot P2Vs first.  What is the popular view on this?

[patanassov]

The main argument is that cold migration is no longer supported. Even if you manage to get a boot CD from somewhere (it can't be downloaded anymore), it won't support new features, i.e. it will most probably work fine with 2003 but hardly with 2008. If you have UEFI firmware and/or GPT disks, it will definitely not work.

OTOH, a situation when hot migration is not recommended is with domain controllers. You can search for KB articles on the subject if needed.

HTH

Plamen

[aiea96701]

Thanks.  I wasn't aware that Cold Migrations were no longer supported.  That explains why it has been nearly impossible to locate a BootCD for new Guest OSs

[King_Robert]

the cold migration will not support the P2V migration as when we start P2V migration the Physical host will be available and accessible for migration.

and if we are doing migration during the host is running the it should be called as host migrations.