[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] [RFC] virCommandRun return error number



On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 11:03 PM, Eric Blake <eblake redhat com> wrote:
[...]
> No need.  You are talking about the error path, the one that only hits
> on the RARE case of OOM.  If we are OOM, we are already hosed - what
> does it matter if we take a few extra calls to a few more virCommand*()
> functions before finally reporting the error to the user?  All that
> matters is that we are hosed gracefully (ie. that we DO report the
> error, instead of crashing).
>

ACK.

>
> One more point: libvirt is generally not the bottleneck.  Remember,
> libvirt is the management, the thing that kicks off the long-running
> tasks.  But the long running tasks are separate processes.  Libvirt
> itself is not doing the long-running task.  Therefore, shaving a few
> instructions off of libvirt is generally going to have a negligible
> effect on the overall performance of your usage of the virt stack.
> Focus on features, not micro-optimizations, unless you can first post
> benchmarks proving that libvirt is indeed the cause of a bottleneck you
> are trying to optimize.
>
Hmmm..., i see. Let me focus on our Libvirt features, thanks.



--
Thanks
Harry Wei


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]