Re: [vdsm] Back to future of vdsm network configuration

2012-12-03 Thread Itamar Heim
On 12/03/2012 04:25 PM, Dan Kenigsberg wrote: On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 04:35:34AM -0500, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: - Original Message - From: Mark Wu wu...@linux.vnet.ibm.com To: VDSM Project Development vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org Cc: Alon Bar-Lev alo...@redhat.com, Dan Kenigsberg

Re: [vdsm] [RFC]about the implement of text-based console

2012-12-03 Thread Saggi Mizrahi
Sorry, it's probably the fact that I don't have enough time to go into the code but I still don't get what you are trying to do. Having it in HTTP and XML-RPC is a bad idea but I imagine that the theoretical solution doesn't depend on any of them. Could you just show some pseudo code of a

Re: [vdsm] Back to future of vdsm network configuration

2012-12-03 Thread Dan Kenigsberg
On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 04:28:16PM +0200, Itamar Heim wrote: On 12/03/2012 04:25 PM, Dan Kenigsberg wrote: On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 04:35:34AM -0500, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: - Original Message - From: Mark Wu wu...@linux.vnet.ibm.com To: VDSM Project Development

Re: [vdsm] [VDSM][RFC] hsm service standalone

2012-12-03 Thread Saggi Mizrahi
HSM is not a package it's an application. Currently it and the rest of VDSM share the same process but they use RPC to communicate. This is done so that one day we can actually have them run as different processes. HSM is not something you import, it's a daemon you communicate with. -

Re: [vdsm] RFD: API: Identifying vdsm objects in the next-gen API

2012-12-03 Thread Adam Litke
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 05:59:09PM -0500, Saggi Mizrahi wrote: - Original Message - From: Adam Litke a...@us.ibm.com To: Saggi Mizrahi smizr...@redhat.com Cc: engine-de...@linode01.ovirt.org, Dan Kenigsberg dan...@redhat.com, Federico Simoncelli fsimo...@redhat.com, Ayal Baron

Re: [vdsm] Back to future of vdsm network configuration

2012-12-03 Thread Itamar Heim
On 12/03/2012 06:54 PM, Dan Kenigsberg wrote: On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 04:28:16PM +0200, Itamar Heim wrote: On 12/03/2012 04:25 PM, Dan Kenigsberg wrote: On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 04:35:34AM -0500, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: - Original Message - From: Mark Wu wu...@linux.vnet.ibm.com To:

Re: [vdsm] RFD: API: Identifying vdsm objects in the next-gen API

2012-12-03 Thread Saggi Mizrahi
- Original Message - From: Adam Litke a...@us.ibm.com To: Saggi Mizrahi smizr...@redhat.com Cc: engine-de...@linode01.ovirt.org, Dan Kenigsberg dan...@redhat.com, Federico Simoncelli fsimo...@redhat.com, Ayal Baron aba...@redhat.com, vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org Sent:

[vdsm] object instancing in the new VDSM API

2012-12-03 Thread Saggi Mizrahi
Currently the suggested scheme treats everything as instances and object have methods. This puts instancing as the responsibility of the API bindings. I suggest changing it to the way json was designed with namespaces and methods. For example instead for the api being: vm = host.getVMsList()[0]

Re: [vdsm] RFD: API: Identifying vdsm objects in the next-gen API

2012-12-03 Thread Adam Litke
On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 03:57:42PM -0500, Saggi Mizrahi wrote: - Original Message - From: Adam Litke a...@us.ibm.com To: Saggi Mizrahi smizr...@redhat.com Cc: engine-de...@linode01.ovirt.org, Dan Kenigsberg dan...@redhat.com, Federico Simoncelli fsimo...@redhat.com, Ayal Baron

Re: [vdsm] object instancing in the new VDSM API

2012-12-03 Thread Saggi Mizrahi
So from what I gather the only thing that is bothering you is that storage operations require a lot of IDs. I get that, I hate that to. It doesn't change the point that it was designed that way. Even if you deem some use cases irrelevant it wouldn't change the fact that this is how people use