On Thu 06 Jun 2013 03:09:59 PM IDT, Omer Frenkel wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roy Golan" <rgolan@redhat.com> To: "Omer Frenkel" <ofrenkel@redhat.com> Cc: engine-devel@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@redhat.com> To: engine-devel@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@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
seems clearer to me.
wiki updated
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?
basically yes, it means we assume users who will change it will be aware the order matters. im ok with that because i assume not many changes will be done here (as this just the defaults)
great I like it simple here.