Re: [ovirt-devel] feature review - ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName

2014-09-13 Thread Dan Kenigsberg
On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 08:50:12AM +0200, Michal Skrivanek wrote:
 
 On Sep 2, 2014, at 21:03 , Nir Soffer nsof...@redhat.com wrote:
 
  - Original Message -
  From: Michal Skrivanek mskri...@redhat.com
  To: Liron Aravot lara...@redhat.com, Dan Kenigsberg 
  dan...@redhat.com, Federico Simoncelli
  fsimo...@redhat.com, Vinzenz Feenstra vfeen...@redhat.com
  Cc: us...@ovirt.org, devel@ovirt.org
  Sent: Tuesday, September 2, 2014 3:29:57 PM
  Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] feature review - 
  ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName
  
  
  On Sep 2, 2014, at 13:11 , Liron Aravot lara...@redhat.com wrote:
  
  
  
  - Original Message -
  From: Federico Simoncelli fsimo...@redhat.com
  To: devel@ovirt.org
  Cc: Liron Aravot lara...@redhat.com, us...@ovirt.org,
  smizr...@redhat.com, Michal Skrivanek
  mskri...@redhat.com, Vinzenz Feenstra vfeen...@redhat.com, Allon
  Mureinik amure...@redhat.com, Dan
  Kenigsberg dan...@redhat.com
  Sent: Tuesday, September 2, 2014 12:50:28 PM
  Subject: Re: feature review - ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName
  
  - Original Message -
  From: Dan Kenigsberg dan...@redhat.com
  To: Liron Aravot lara...@redhat.com
  Cc: us...@ovirt.org, devel@ovirt.org, smizr...@redhat.com,
  fsimo...@redhat.com, Michal Skrivanek
  mskri...@redhat.com, Vinzenz Feenstra vfeen...@redhat.com, Allon
  Mureinik amure...@redhat.com
  Sent: Monday, September 1, 2014 11:23:45 PM
  Subject: Re: feature review - ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName
  
  On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 07:20:04AM -0400, Liron Aravot wrote:
  Feel free to review the the following feature.
  
  http://www.ovirt.org/Features/ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName
  
  Thanks for posting this feature page. Two things worry me about this
  feature. The first is timing. It is not reasonable to suggest an API
  change, and expect it to get to ovirt-3.5.0. We are two late anyway.
  
  The other one is the suggested API. You suggest placing volatile and
  optional infomation in getVMList. It won't be the first time that we
  have it (guestIPs, guestFQDN, clientIP, and displayIP are there) but
  it's foreign to the notion of conf reported by getVMList() - the set
  of parameters needed to recreate the VM.
  
  The fact is that today we return guest information in list(Full=true), We
  decide on it's notion
  and it seems like we already made our minds when guest info was added 
  there
  :) . I don't see any harm in returning the disk mapping there
  and if we'll want to extract the guest info out, we can extract all of it
  in later version (4?) without need for BC. Having
  the information spread between different verbs is no better imo.
  
  At first sight this seems something belonging to getVmStats (which
  is reporting already other guest agent information).
  
  
  Fede, I've mentioned in the wiki, getVmStats is called by the engine every
  few seconds and therefore that info
  wasn't added there but to list() which is called only when the hash is
  changed. If everyone is in for that simple
  solution i'm fine with that, but Michal/Vincenz preferred it that way.
  
  yes, that was the main reason me and Vinzenz suggested to use list(). 15s 
  is
  a reasonable compromise, IMHO.
  And since it's also reported by guest agent in a similar manner (and 
  actually
  via the same vdsm-ga API call) as other guest information I think it
  should sit alongside guestIPs, FQDN, etc…
  
  Maybe not the best place, but I would leave that for a bigger discussion
  if/when we want to refactor reporting of the guest agent information
  
  Given that we are late, adding disk mapping where other guest info is
  in a backward compatible way looks reasonable.
  
  Did you consider adding a new verb for getting guest information?
  This 
  verb can be called once after starting/recovering a vm, and then only when
  guest info hash changes (like the xml hash).
 
 yes, was considered but turned down. 
 Main reason is an additional overhead and pollution of the API for a tiny 
 little item which is in the same group of guest agent reported items. It 
 doesn't make sense to introduce an inconsistency just this one item.
 Refactoring of the frequency of what we report is indeed long overdue, but we 
 shouldn't start here…(the first and most offending is still the application 
 list)

Ok, lacking another alternative, let's dump the maps to list().
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: [ovirt-devel] feature review - ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName

2014-09-03 Thread Michal Skrivanek

On Sep 2, 2014, at 21:03 , Nir Soffer nsof...@redhat.com wrote:

 - Original Message -
 From: Michal Skrivanek mskri...@redhat.com
 To: Liron Aravot lara...@redhat.com, Dan Kenigsberg 
 dan...@redhat.com, Federico Simoncelli
 fsimo...@redhat.com, Vinzenz Feenstra vfeen...@redhat.com
 Cc: us...@ovirt.org, devel@ovirt.org
 Sent: Tuesday, September 2, 2014 3:29:57 PM
 Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] feature review - ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName
 
 
 On Sep 2, 2014, at 13:11 , Liron Aravot lara...@redhat.com wrote:
 
 
 
 - Original Message -
 From: Federico Simoncelli fsimo...@redhat.com
 To: devel@ovirt.org
 Cc: Liron Aravot lara...@redhat.com, us...@ovirt.org,
 smizr...@redhat.com, Michal Skrivanek
 mskri...@redhat.com, Vinzenz Feenstra vfeen...@redhat.com, Allon
 Mureinik amure...@redhat.com, Dan
 Kenigsberg dan...@redhat.com
 Sent: Tuesday, September 2, 2014 12:50:28 PM
 Subject: Re: feature review - ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName
 
 - Original Message -
 From: Dan Kenigsberg dan...@redhat.com
 To: Liron Aravot lara...@redhat.com
 Cc: us...@ovirt.org, devel@ovirt.org, smizr...@redhat.com,
 fsimo...@redhat.com, Michal Skrivanek
 mskri...@redhat.com, Vinzenz Feenstra vfeen...@redhat.com, Allon
 Mureinik amure...@redhat.com
 Sent: Monday, September 1, 2014 11:23:45 PM
 Subject: Re: feature review - ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName
 
 On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 07:20:04AM -0400, Liron Aravot wrote:
 Feel free to review the the following feature.
 
 http://www.ovirt.org/Features/ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName
 
 Thanks for posting this feature page. Two things worry me about this
 feature. The first is timing. It is not reasonable to suggest an API
 change, and expect it to get to ovirt-3.5.0. We are two late anyway.
 
 The other one is the suggested API. You suggest placing volatile and
 optional infomation in getVMList. It won't be the first time that we
 have it (guestIPs, guestFQDN, clientIP, and displayIP are there) but
 it's foreign to the notion of conf reported by getVMList() - the set
 of parameters needed to recreate the VM.
 
 The fact is that today we return guest information in list(Full=true), We
 decide on it's notion
 and it seems like we already made our minds when guest info was added there
 :) . I don't see any harm in returning the disk mapping there
 and if we'll want to extract the guest info out, we can extract all of it
 in later version (4?) without need for BC. Having
 the information spread between different verbs is no better imo.
 
 At first sight this seems something belonging to getVmStats (which
 is reporting already other guest agent information).
 
 
 Fede, I've mentioned in the wiki, getVmStats is called by the engine every
 few seconds and therefore that info
 wasn't added there but to list() which is called only when the hash is
 changed. If everyone is in for that simple
 solution i'm fine with that, but Michal/Vincenz preferred it that way.
 
 yes, that was the main reason me and Vinzenz suggested to use list(). 15s is
 a reasonable compromise, IMHO.
 And since it's also reported by guest agent in a similar manner (and actually
 via the same vdsm-ga API call) as other guest information I think it
 should sit alongside guestIPs, FQDN, etc…
 
 Maybe not the best place, but I would leave that for a bigger discussion
 if/when we want to refactor reporting of the guest agent information
 
 Given that we are late, adding disk mapping where other guest info is
 in a backward compatible way looks reasonable.
 
 Did you consider adding a new verb for getting guest information?
 This 
 verb can be called once after starting/recovering a vm, and then only when
 guest info hash changes (like the xml hash).

yes, was considered but turned down. 
Main reason is an additional overhead and pollution of the API for a tiny 
little item which is in the same group of guest agent reported items. It 
doesn't make sense to introduce an inconsistency just this one item.
Refactoring of the frequency of what we report is indeed long overdue, but we 
shouldn't start here…(the first and most offending is still the application 
list)

Thanks,
michal

 
 Nir
 
 

___
Devel mailing list
Devel@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel


Re: [ovirt-devel] feature review - ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName

2014-09-02 Thread Michal Skrivanek

On Sep 2, 2014, at 13:11 , Liron Aravot lara...@redhat.com wrote:

 
 
 - Original Message -
 From: Federico Simoncelli fsimo...@redhat.com
 To: devel@ovirt.org
 Cc: Liron Aravot lara...@redhat.com, us...@ovirt.org, 
 smizr...@redhat.com, Michal Skrivanek
 mskri...@redhat.com, Vinzenz Feenstra vfeen...@redhat.com, Allon 
 Mureinik amure...@redhat.com, Dan
 Kenigsberg dan...@redhat.com
 Sent: Tuesday, September 2, 2014 12:50:28 PM
 Subject: Re: feature review - ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName
 
 - Original Message -
 From: Dan Kenigsberg dan...@redhat.com
 To: Liron Aravot lara...@redhat.com
 Cc: us...@ovirt.org, devel@ovirt.org, smizr...@redhat.com,
 fsimo...@redhat.com, Michal Skrivanek
 mskri...@redhat.com, Vinzenz Feenstra vfeen...@redhat.com, Allon
 Mureinik amure...@redhat.com
 Sent: Monday, September 1, 2014 11:23:45 PM
 Subject: Re: feature review - ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName
 
 On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 07:20:04AM -0400, Liron Aravot wrote:
 Feel free to review the the following feature.
 
 http://www.ovirt.org/Features/ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName
 
 Thanks for posting this feature page. Two things worry me about this
 feature. The first is timing. It is not reasonable to suggest an API
 change, and expect it to get to ovirt-3.5.0. We are two late anyway.
 
 The other one is the suggested API. You suggest placing volatile and
 optional infomation in getVMList. It won't be the first time that we
 have it (guestIPs, guestFQDN, clientIP, and displayIP are there) but
 it's foreign to the notion of conf reported by getVMList() - the set
 of parameters needed to recreate the VM.
 
 The fact is that today we return guest information in list(Full=true), We 
 decide on it's notion
 and it seems like we already made our minds when guest info was added there 
 :) . I don't see any harm in returning the disk mapping there
 and if we'll want to extract the guest info out, we can extract all of it in 
 later version (4?) without need for BC. Having
 the information spread between different verbs is no better imo.
 
 At first sight this seems something belonging to getVmStats (which
 is reporting already other guest agent information).
 
 
 Fede, I've mentioned in the wiki, getVmStats is called by the engine every 
 few seconds and therefore that info
 wasn't added there but to list() which is called only when the hash is 
 changed. If everyone is in for that simple
 solution i'm fine with that, but Michal/Vincenz preferred it that way.

yes, that was the main reason me and Vinzenz suggested to use list(). 15s is a 
reasonable compromise, IMHO.
And since it's also reported by guest agent in a similar manner (and actually 
via the same vdsm-ga API call) as other guest information I think it should 
sit alongside guestIPs, FQDN, etc…

Maybe not the best place, but I would leave that for a bigger discussion 
if/when we want to refactor reporting of the guest agent information

Thanks,
michal


 
 Federico
 
 ___
 Devel mailing list
 Devel@ovirt.org
 http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

___
Devel mailing list
Devel@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel


Re: [ovirt-devel] feature review - ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName

2014-09-02 Thread Nir Soffer
- Original Message -
 From: Michal Skrivanek mskri...@redhat.com
 To: Liron Aravot lara...@redhat.com, Dan Kenigsberg 
 dan...@redhat.com, Federico Simoncelli
 fsimo...@redhat.com, Vinzenz Feenstra vfeen...@redhat.com
 Cc: us...@ovirt.org, devel@ovirt.org
 Sent: Tuesday, September 2, 2014 3:29:57 PM
 Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] feature review - ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName
 
 
 On Sep 2, 2014, at 13:11 , Liron Aravot lara...@redhat.com wrote:
 
  
  
  - Original Message -
  From: Federico Simoncelli fsimo...@redhat.com
  To: devel@ovirt.org
  Cc: Liron Aravot lara...@redhat.com, us...@ovirt.org,
  smizr...@redhat.com, Michal Skrivanek
  mskri...@redhat.com, Vinzenz Feenstra vfeen...@redhat.com, Allon
  Mureinik amure...@redhat.com, Dan
  Kenigsberg dan...@redhat.com
  Sent: Tuesday, September 2, 2014 12:50:28 PM
  Subject: Re: feature review - ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName
  
  - Original Message -
  From: Dan Kenigsberg dan...@redhat.com
  To: Liron Aravot lara...@redhat.com
  Cc: us...@ovirt.org, devel@ovirt.org, smizr...@redhat.com,
  fsimo...@redhat.com, Michal Skrivanek
  mskri...@redhat.com, Vinzenz Feenstra vfeen...@redhat.com, Allon
  Mureinik amure...@redhat.com
  Sent: Monday, September 1, 2014 11:23:45 PM
  Subject: Re: feature review - ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName
  
  On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 07:20:04AM -0400, Liron Aravot wrote:
  Feel free to review the the following feature.
  
  http://www.ovirt.org/Features/ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName
  
  Thanks for posting this feature page. Two things worry me about this
  feature. The first is timing. It is not reasonable to suggest an API
  change, and expect it to get to ovirt-3.5.0. We are two late anyway.
  
  The other one is the suggested API. You suggest placing volatile and
  optional infomation in getVMList. It won't be the first time that we
  have it (guestIPs, guestFQDN, clientIP, and displayIP are there) but
  it's foreign to the notion of conf reported by getVMList() - the set
  of parameters needed to recreate the VM.
  
  The fact is that today we return guest information in list(Full=true), We
  decide on it's notion
  and it seems like we already made our minds when guest info was added there
  :) . I don't see any harm in returning the disk mapping there
  and if we'll want to extract the guest info out, we can extract all of it
  in later version (4?) without need for BC. Having
  the information spread between different verbs is no better imo.
  
  At first sight this seems something belonging to getVmStats (which
  is reporting already other guest agent information).
  
  
  Fede, I've mentioned in the wiki, getVmStats is called by the engine every
  few seconds and therefore that info
  wasn't added there but to list() which is called only when the hash is
  changed. If everyone is in for that simple
  solution i'm fine with that, but Michal/Vincenz preferred it that way.
 
 yes, that was the main reason me and Vinzenz suggested to use list(). 15s is
 a reasonable compromise, IMHO.
 And since it's also reported by guest agent in a similar manner (and actually
 via the same vdsm-ga API call) as other guest information I think it
 should sit alongside guestIPs, FQDN, etc…
 
 Maybe not the best place, but I would leave that for a bigger discussion
 if/when we want to refactor reporting of the guest agent information

Given that we are late, adding disk mapping where other guest info is
in a backward compatible way looks reasonable.

Did you consider adding a new verb for getting guest information? This 
verb can be called once after starting/recovering a vm, and then only when
guest info hash changes (like the xml hash).

Nir


___
Devel mailing list
Devel@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: [ovirt-devel] feature review - ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName

2014-09-01 Thread Dan Kenigsberg
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 07:20:04AM -0400, Liron Aravot wrote:
 Feel free to review the the following feature.
 
 http://www.ovirt.org/Features/ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName

Thanks for posting this feature page. Two things worry me about this
feature. The first is timing. It is not reasonable to suggest an API
change, and expect it to get to ovirt-3.5.0. We are two late anyway.

The other one is the suggested API. You suggest placing volatile and
optional infomation in getVMList. It won't be the first time that we
have it (guestIPs, guestFQDN, clientIP, and displayIP are there) but
it's foreign to the notion of conf reported by getVMList() - the set
of parameters needed to recreate the VM.

Would you describe the motivation for using this verb? What are the
pros and cons? Which other ideas where considered?

Regards,
Dan.
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel


[ovirt-devel] feature review - ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName

2014-08-31 Thread Liron Aravot
Feel free to review the the following feature.

http://www.ovirt.org/Features/ReportGuestDisksLogicalDeviceName
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel