On 01/30/2012 08:59 AM, [email protected] wrote:
On Monday 30 January 2012 08:12 PM, Perry Myers wrote:
On 01/30/2012 08:45 AM, Daniel Veillard wrote:
Hi everybody,
I guess the best is to ask Chip Vincent about those oVirt Node
integration issues. CIM is not always trivial to setup in a normal
RHEL environment, and I'm afraid nobody tried it on a read-only
root/stateless environment. Chip I think the expertise from some
of your libvirt-cim team is needed there, I guess the best is to provide
an image to someone knowledgeable in the set-u and have him check
the issues. Maybe Eduardo ro you can have a look ?
thanks !
Daniel
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 10:39:03AM -0500, Perry Myers wrote:
One of the items on our backlog has been to include CIM server/providers
on oVirt Node. Initially we'll do this statically and include things
like sblim, tog-pegasus, libvirt-cim as part of the core Node recipe.
P.S.: shouldn't only one of sblim/tog-pegasus be needed and not both ?
One server should be sufficient isn't it and the goal is still
to limit the size of images. Which one to pick may be the result
of which one is the easier to coerce to work in root RO mode,
or the smaller of the two ...
I asked Anthony about this, and he explained it to me... sblim is both
a collection of CIM providers as well as a server. tog-pegasus is just
the server.
So you can either use:
sblim + tog-pegasus
or
sblim + sblim-sfcb
If you omit sfcb from the oVirt Node, then you can use tog-pegasus in
its place. It's also my understanding that sblim-sfcb and tog-pegasus
are not fully interchangeable as there are some providers that will only
work with one or the other. So far, it seems like tog-pegasus is what
folks want specifically, so that is what we have been focusing on.
We have had issues with sfcb and tog-pegasus conflicting in the past:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604578
sblim + sblim-sfcb is what we needed and tog-pegasus was installed as
part of the @base install.
Let me start out by saying that I know almost nothing about CIM so I'm largely
talking out of my....
I think the first question to answer is why we're adding CIM to oVirt node in
the first place.
Is the goal to expose a specific DMTF schema for on-node management? Is it to
allow arbitrary third-party CMPI providers to be added for hardware management?
Is it to allow third party CIM management suites to see and manage ovirt-node
instances?
For just about any of these, if the answer isn't qualified with "exclusively for
use by ovirt-engine", how is a split brain going to be avoided?
I think the provider needs ultimately will determine what cimmon is necessary.
Just to further complicate things, most providers these days are still only
32-bit as I understand it...
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
_______________________________________________
node-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/node-devel
