Re: [Engine-devel] cluster emulation mode feature

From: "Roy Golan" <rgolan(a)redhat.com&gt; To: "Omer Frenkel" <ofrenkel(a)redhat.com&gt; Cc: engine-devel(a)ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, June 6, 2013 12:33:26 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] cluster emulation mode feature On Thu 06 Jun 2013 10:20:30 AM IDT, Omer Frenkel wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Roy Golan" <rgolan(a)redhat.com&gt; >> To: engine-devel(a)ovirt.org >> Sent: Thursday, June 6, 2013 8:17:54 AM >> Subject: [Engine-devel] cluster emulation mode feature >> >> Hi, >> >> A new wiki has been published on Cluster Emulation mode >> http://www.ovirt.org/Cluster_emulation_modes >> >> Please review. >> >> Thanks, >> Roy >> _______________________________________________ >> Engine-devel mailing list >> Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org >> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel >> > > maybe better to name host field as supported_emulated_machines - since it > holds the list of supported as reported from vdsm. > will change if this seems clearer

> the following is a copy from the wiki > " > consider this pseudo-code: > > operational = false > if cluster.emulationMode == NULL > for configVal in Config.ClusterEmulationMode(3.3) > if configVal in host.emulationModes > cluster.emulationMode = configVal > operational = true > else if clusterEmulationMode in host.emulationMode > operational = true > if (!operational) > set host non operationl, reason = UNSUPPORTED_EMULATION_MODE > " > > first, i guess where you write '3.3' its actually should be > 'cluster.compatibility' yes its just a visual notion of the version > another thing, the configuration will probably have more than 1 option for > emulated machine, > for example 3.3 rhel could have {(for EL-)RHEL6.4.0,RHEL6.3.0,..,(for > other-)pc-1.3,pc-1.2..} > we need to make sure the list is used ordered so that the greatest value > will be first, > since if host supports many, the latest will be used. > in cpu-flags there is a specific number to do this order, maybe same > approach can be taken here, > as i'm not sure the RHEL/pc values are consistent (on my f18 i also have > 'pc-i440fx-1.4') isn't the order of the list enough?