[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: [Libvir] Request for additional entry points
- From: Anthony Liguori <aliguori us ibm com>
- To: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange redhat com>
- Cc: libvir-list redhat com
- Subject: Re: [Libvir] Request for additional entry points
- Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 11:51:53 -0500
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 04:47:38PM -0500, Daniel Veillard wrote:
On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 10:56:06AM -0700, Jim Fehlig wrote:
As discussed on the xen-cim call on 3/31, the Xen CIM provider needs
some additional entry points in libvirt. I would like to open a
discussion about adding the following entry points to libvirt.
virDomainSetConfig(virConnectPtr conn, const char *xmlDesc)
Stores the domU config data in xenstore. The domU is not running yet
but enumerating domains would return the config for the domain as well
as any running domains. This would support the notion of a defined but
inactive virtual machine. Daniel noted that the config could be cached
in libvirt, preventing (to some degree) modifying the config out-of-band
prior to activating the domain. Note that the current
virConnectListDomains() implies enumerating only running domains since a
list of domain IDs is returned. Perhaps virConnectListDomains() will
have to be expanded to include defined domains or another entry point to
enumerate defined domains.
Well libvirt doesn't have the notion of 'passive' domain yet, i.e. domain
we know exists but are not running or activated at a given point in time.
If we define virDomainSetConfig() then we have to be able to extract at least
the name (and uuid) from the xmlDesc. And that routine could then returm
a virDomainPtr associated to this unactive domain (or the associated
active domain if it exists). Those unactive domains could then be listed
in virConnectListDomains(). In general libvirt doesn't yet create a unique
proxy object per running domain, the unicity need to be garanteed, it's a TODO
and add other constraints like reference counting and mutex when modifying
I'd actually question whether libvirt should have any concept of 'passive'
or 'inactive' domains at all. Just to play out a few scenarios:
We've discussed this before and I think the most compelling argument for
passive domain support in libvirt (and even at a lower level such as
Xend) is the following scenario:
Let's say a user creates a virtual FC6 virtual machine that she is going
to use to test her apps under Gnome (she's a KDE user). The machine
isn't always there b/c she rarely needs it. She created it with some
nifty KDE tool that has yet to be written.
Of course, she finds out about this neat applet that you can use to
managing running domains. If there isn't a common way of accessing
passive domains then she won't see the FC6 VM.
Now, I don't think that *all* domains should have to have passive
equivalents (which is a requirement in the CIM provider today) because
of some of the scenarios you outlined. However, I think not attempting
to have a common API for passive domains is going to creative a mess as
we get a larger number of management tools.
* Definitions of inactive domains are stored on a remote server, libvirt
has no visibilty into this system. virDomainSetConfig() would not help
since there is no concept of a domain being inactive on a single host,
rather inactive domains can be deployed to any host in the server farm
* Definitions are visible on the local filesystem, but this FS is shared
NFS / SAN storage. Again while their config files may be technically
visible via the shared filesystem, there is no meaningful association
between an inactive config & a host.
* Domains are created from config 'templates'. The template defines a
generic resource configuration, turned into a fully fledged config
on-demand - perhaps with the variables plugged into the template
coming from an alternate datastore (SQL databsae perhaps). In this
case there would be no sense in storing pre-made XML configs, since
the master info is a combo of the template & SQL database entries.
So, really the only case where there is any meaningful concept of 'passive'
domain configs associated with a static single host model - for example that
provided by XenD which happen to have a simple store of inactive domains
in /etc/xen. There are so many other interesting management scenarios where
inactive domains don't really have a persistent association with a single
host, or indeed any passive configuration at all, that I'm not sure there
would be much value in libvirt to representing passive domains at all.
Thinking about what tools might need information on inactive domains:
- Desktop management tool - cf VMWare Workstation. Possibly, but even
here there is no reason such a tool represents inactive domains in
terms of a libvirt XML config file. It may well have generic templates
eg 'Linux Web Server and instances 'web0.google.com', 'web1.google.com',
'web2.google.com', where the only instance specific data is the hostname
and master disk image.
- Data center management tool - it may well have a concept of inactive
domain configs, but it almost certainly won't be associated with a
single host, so unlikely to be asking libvirt to list inactive domains.
I struggle to think of cases where libvirt would need to provide info on
inactive domains, which are not distorted to serve the needs of a specific
application's representational model. If a local app wants to maintain
a local list of config files for inactive domains, let it do so itself.
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]