split config file for HSM service standalone
http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/10363/2

I have move the 'irs' section from vdsm configure to hsm configure.
There are some problems.
IMHO, only hsm code should directly call  'irs'.
such as vdsm/utils.py <http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/10363/2/vdsm/utils.py>, should not call hsm configure.

also vdsm/libvirtvm.py <http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/10363/2/vdsm/libvirtvm.py>, should not call hsm configure.

should hsm service standalone provide a new interface to access the 'irs' section?


On 12/04/2012 01:22 AM, Saggi Mizrahi wrote:
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.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Kenigsberg" <dan...@redhat.com>
To: "Saggi Mizrahi" <smizr...@redhat.com>
Cc: "Sheldon" <shao...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, a...@linux.vnet.ibm.com, 
vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org, "Zheng Sheng
ZS Zhou" <zhshz...@cn.ibm.com>
Sent: Monday, December 3, 2012 12:01:28 PM
Subject: Re: [vdsm] [VDSM][RFC] hsm service standalone

On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 11:35:44AM -0500, Saggi Mizrahi wrote:
There are a bunch of precondition to having HSM pulled out.
On simple things is that someone needs to go through
storage/misc.py and utils.py and move all the code out to logical
packages.
There also needs to be a bit of a rearrangement of the code files
so they can import the reusable code properly.

I am also still very much against putting core VDSM in to
site-packages.
Would you elaborate on your position? Do you mind the wrong
implications
this may give about API stability?




--
Sheldon Feng(冯少合)<shao...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
IBM Linux Technology Center

_______________________________________________
vdsm-devel mailing list
vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel

Reply via email to