Re: [Libvir] The problem of the definition of tuning informations

2007-11-14 Thread Tatsuro Enokura
Hi, Daniel Daniel Veillard wrote: > I promised that mail for the beginning of the week but I still have > a very hard time to try to formulate a good plan of action, I'm still > stuck in a dilemna, see below. > > What is it? > --- > I think tuning informations are that set of parameters

Re: [Libvir] The problem of the definition of tuning informations

2007-11-13 Thread Daniel Veillard
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 11:51:09AM -0500, beth kon wrote: > beth kon wrote: > >When a domain is started, the caller can specify a minimal start (XML > >only) or a tuned start (XML plus tuning). Lower level libvirt code > >would understand the specifics of the hypervisor well enough to know > >wh

Re: [Libvir] The problem of the definition of tuning informations

2007-11-13 Thread beth kon
beth kon wrote: Daniel Veillard wrote: On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 02:00:10PM -0600, Ryan Harper wrote: * Daniel Veillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-11-08 10:08]: I promised that mail for the beginning of the week but I still have I think tuning informations are that set of parameters ass

Re: [Libvir] The problem of the definition of tuning informations

2007-11-13 Thread beth kon
Daniel Veillard wrote: On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 02:00:10PM -0600, Ryan Harper wrote: * Daniel Veillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-11-08 10:08]: I promised that mail for the beginning of the week but I still have I think tuning informations are that set of parameters associated to a doma

Re: [Libvir] The problem of the definition of tuning informations

2007-11-09 Thread Daniel Veillard
On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 06:06:24PM -0700, Jim Fehlig wrote: > Daniel Veillard wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 02:00:10PM -0600, Ryan Harper wrote: > >> I don't have any objection to separating "tuning" information as long as > >> we have the ability to merge permanent domain parameters with its

Re: [Libvir] The problem of the definition of tuning informations

2007-11-08 Thread Jim Fehlig
Daniel Veillard wrote: > On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 02:00:10PM -0600, Ryan Harper wrote: > >> * Daniel Veillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-11-08 10:08]: >> >>> I promised that mail for the beginning of the week but I still have >>> I think tuning informations are that set of parameters associ

Re: [Libvir] The problem of the definition of tuning informations

2007-11-08 Thread Daniel Veillard
On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 04:31:49PM -0500, Daniel Veillard wrote: > On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 02:34:05PM -0500, beth kon wrote: > > Just to be sure I understand, are you suggesting removing tuning > > information from any configuration file and making it a runtime exercise > > to set it up? (That is

Re: [Libvir] The problem of the definition of tuning informations

2007-11-08 Thread Daniel Veillard
On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 03:41:12PM -0600, Ryan Harper wrote: > * Daniel Veillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-11-08 15:27]: > > yes, I understand and that's why I agreed to add the cpuset information > > at that point it's more than tunning because it may be irreversible for the > > lifetime of the

Re: [Libvir] The problem of the definition of tuning informations

2007-11-08 Thread Ryan Harper
* Daniel Veillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-11-08 15:27]: > On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 02:00:10PM -0600, Ryan Harper wrote: > > * Daniel Veillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-11-08 10:08]: > > > I promised that mail for the beginning of the week but I still have > > > I think tuning informations are th

Re: [Libvir] The problem of the definition of tuning informations

2007-11-08 Thread Daniel Veillard
On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 02:34:05PM -0500, beth kon wrote: > Daniel Veillard wrote: > > > > > > > > >My opinion: > >--- > > > >We need better tools, even for simple use case to be able to save > >an existing tuning for a domain or a full machine, and reload it > >when needed. This is IMH

Re: [Libvir] The problem of the definition of tuning informations

2007-11-08 Thread Daniel Veillard
On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 02:00:10PM -0600, Ryan Harper wrote: > * Daniel Veillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-11-08 10:08]: > > I promised that mail for the beginning of the week but I still have > > I think tuning informations are that set of parameters associated > > to a domain or a host, which a

Re: [Libvir] The problem of the definition of tuning informations

2007-11-08 Thread Ryan Harper
* Daniel Veillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-11-08 10:08]: > I promised that mail for the beginning of the week but I still have > I think tuning informations are that set of parameters associated > to a domain or a host, which are not stricly needed to get the > domain(s) working but improve the

Re: [Libvir] The problem of the definition of tuning informations

2007-11-08 Thread beth kon
Daniel Veillard wrote: My opinion: --- We need better tools, even for simple use case to be able to save an existing tuning for a domain or a full machine, and reload it when needed. This is IMHO better done on top of the existing API which already have the entry points to impleme

[Libvir] The problem of the definition of tuning informations

2007-11-08 Thread Daniel Veillard
I promised that mail for the beginning of the week but I still have a very hard time to try to formulate a good plan of action, I'm still stuck in a dilemna, see below. What is it? --- I think tuning informations are that set of parameters associated to a domain or a host, which are not