Re: [ovirt-devel] [vdsm] Engine XML: metadata and devices from XML

> On 17 Mar 2017, at 15:57, Francesco Romani <fromani(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > On 03/16/2017 08:03 PM, Francesco Romani wrote: >> On 03/16/2017 01:26 PM, Francesco Romani wrote: >>> On 03/16/2017 11:47 AM, Michal Skrivanek wrote: >>>>> On 16 Mar 2017, at 09:45, Francesco Romani <fromani(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>>>> >>>>> We talked about sending storage device purely on metadata, letting Vdsm >>>>> rebuild them and getting the XML like today. >>>>> >>>>> In the other direction, Vdsm will pass through the XML (perhaps only >>>>> parts of it, e.g. the devices subtree) like before. >>>>> >>>>> This way we can minimize the changes we are uncertain of, and more >>>>> importantly, we can minimize the risky changes. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The following is a realistic example of how the XML could look like if >>>>> we send all but the storage devices. It is built using my pyxmlpickle >>>>> module (see [3] below). >>>> That’s quite verbose. How much work would it need to actually minimize it and turn it into something more simple. >>>> Most such stuff should go away and I believe it would be beneficial to make it difficult to use to discourage using metadata as a generic junkyard >>> It is verbose because it is generic - indeed perhaps too generic. >>> I can try something else based on a concept from Martin Polednik. Will >>> follow up soon. >> Early preview: >> https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/q/status:open+project:vdsm+branch:master+topic... >> >> still plenty of TODOs, I expect to be reviewable material worst case >> monday morning. > This is how typical XML could look like: > > <metadata> > <ovirt-tune:qos /> > <ovirt-vm:vm /> > <devices> > <ovirt-instance:graphics> not under the <ovirt-vm:vm>? any reason?