On 9 March 2017 at 09:38, Yaniv Kaul <ykaul(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > I don't see a good reason why we need anything but qemu-kvm. > The following commit adds the requirement - but I don't see the real need > for it: The last time I check Lago simply does not work with out it.

Also I seem to remember that back when Lago was called STF, snapshots did not work or qemu-kvm. But maybe that has changed by now. Why does *-ev exist at all? Could it be consolidated with the non *-ev packages some day?

-- Barak Korren bkorren(a)redhat.com RHCE, RHCi, RHV-DevOps Team https://ifireball.wordpress.com/

Very surprising. Can't think of a good reason why.

From what I understand, new features are not always backported to the

Very surprising. Can't think of a good reason why.

On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 1:51 PM Nadav Goldin <ngoldin(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > Very surprising. Can't think of a good reason why. > > with qemu-kvm-1.5.3-126.el7.x86_64: > > libvirt: QEMU Driver error : unsupported configuration: IOThreads not > supported for this QEMU > Ah, my fault for adding iothreads. We could remove them (they don't add more than a small performance improvement, hardly noticeable most likely) if it makes deployment harder.

Y. > I guess snapshots might be another problem, though never tested it. > > >From what I understand, new features are not always backported to the > 'plain' 'qemu-kvm'. This[1] was the best explanation I could find, > though its not really complete. > > > > [1] https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-virt/2015- > October/004717.html > > On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 11:26 AM, Barak Korren <bkorren(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > On 9 March 2017 at 11:12, Yaniv Kaul <ykaul(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >> > >> Very surprising. Can't think of a good reason why. > >> > > You are welcome to try and either prove me wrong, or find the reason > > (And potentially fix it...) > > Alternatively open a Lago issue and we'll get to it some day... > > > > -- > > Barak Korren > > bkorren(a)redhat.com > > RHCE, RHCi, RHV-DevOps Team > > https://ifireball.wordpress.com/ > > _______________________________________________ > > lago-devel mailing list > > lago-devel(a)ovirt.org > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/lago-devel > _______________________________________________ lago-devel mailing list lago-devel(a)ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/lago-devel

On Mar 16, 2017 1:40 PM, "Eyal Edri" <eedri(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 6:08 PM, Yaniv Kaul <ykaul(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 1:51 PM Nadav Goldin <ngoldin(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >> > Very surprising. Can't think of a good reason why. >> >> with qemu-kvm-1.5.3-126.el7.x86_64: >> >> libvirt: QEMU Driver error : unsupported configuration: IOThreads not >> supported for this QEMU >> > > Ah, my fault for adding iothreads. We could remove them (they don't add > more than a small performance improvement, hardly noticeable most likely) > if it makes deployment harder. > Can you send a patch to remove it or open an issue? If we can drop the -ev requirement it will ease the demo tool installation as well. B Sure, but is that the only -ev feature we use? Y. > Y. > > >> I guess snapshots might be another problem, though never tested it. >> >> >From what I understand, new features are not always backported to the >> 'plain' 'qemu-kvm'. This[1] was the best explanation I could find, >> though its not really complete. >> >> >> >> [1] https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-virt/2015-October/ >> 004717.html >> >> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 11:26 AM, Barak Korren <bkorren(a)redhat.com&gt; >> wrote: >> > On 9 March 2017 at 11:12, Yaniv Kaul <ykaul(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> >> >> >> Very surprising. Can't think of a good reason why. >> >> >> > You are welcome to try and either prove me wrong, or find the reason >> > (And potentially fix it...) >> > Alternatively open a Lago issue and we'll get to it some day... >> > >> > -- >> > Barak Korren >> > bkorren(a)redhat.com >> > RHCE, RHCi, RHV-DevOps Team >> > https://ifireball.wordpress.com/ >> > _______________________________________________ >> > lago-devel mailing list >> > lago-devel(a)ovirt.org >> > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/lago-devel >> > > _______________________________________________ > lago-devel mailing list > lago-devel(a)ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/lago-devel > > -- Eyal Edri Associate Manager RHV DevOps EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D Red Hat Israel phone: +972-9-7692018 <+972%209-769-2018> irc: eedri (on #tlv #rhev-dev #rhev-integ)

From what I understand: qemu-kvm exists for backward compatibility,

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 2:37 PM, Eyal Edri <eedri(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > We can build Lago unstable w/o it and run OST on the manual job to verify > none of the tests use it. The tests are not the issue - it's the L0 qemu-kvm - the way Lago itself uses qemu-kvm. I'd like to ensure we don't shoot ourselves in the foot by not using it - I assume not. I'll see if I can get this data from libvirt's 'capabilities', if not, I'll drop it and we'll see how it goes. It's not like it's a huge performance win right now. Y. > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Yaniv Kaul <ykaul(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> >> >> >> On Mar 16, 2017 1:40 PM, "Eyal Edri" <eedri(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 6:08 PM, Yaniv Kaul <ykaul(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 1:51 PM Nadav Goldin <ngoldin(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>>> >>>> > Very surprising. Can't think of a good reason why. >>>> >>>> with qemu-kvm-1.5.3-126.el7.x86_64: >>>> >>>> libvirt: QEMU Driver error : unsupported configuration: IOThreads not >>>> supported for this QEMU >>> >>> >>> Ah, my fault for adding iothreads. We could remove them (they don't add >>> more than a small performance improvement, hardly noticeable most likely) >>> if it makes deployment harder. >> >> >> Can you send a patch to remove it or open an issue? >> If we can drop the -ev requirement it will ease the demo tool >> installation as well. >> >> >> B >> Sure, but is that the only -ev feature we use? >> Y. >> >> >>> >>> Y. >>> >>>> >>>> I guess snapshots might be another problem, though never tested it. >>>> >>>> >From what I understand, new features are not always backported to the >>>> 'plain' 'qemu-kvm'. This[1] was the best explanation I could find, >>>> though its not really complete. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> [1] >>>> https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-virt/2015-October/004717.html >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 11:26 AM, Barak Korren <bkorren(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>> wrote: >>>> > On 9 March 2017 at 11:12, Yaniv Kaul <ykaul(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >> Very surprising. Can't think of a good reason why. >>>> >> >>>> > You are welcome to try and either prove me wrong, or find the reason >>>> > (And potentially fix it...) >>>> > Alternatively open a Lago issue and we'll get to it some day... >>>> > >>>> > -- >>>> > Barak Korren >>>> > bkorren(a)redhat.com >>>> > RHCE, RHCi, RHV-DevOps Team >>>> > https://ifireball.wordpress.com/ >>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>> > lago-devel mailing list >>>> > lago-devel(a)ovirt.org >>>> > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/lago-devel >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> lago-devel mailing list >>> lago-devel(a)ovirt.org >>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/lago-devel >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Eyal Edri >> Associate Manager >> RHV DevOps >> EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D >> Red Hat Israel >> >> phone: +972-9-7692018 >> irc: eedri (on #tlv #rhev-dev #rhev-integ) >> >> > > > > -- > Eyal Edri > Associate Manager > RHV DevOps > EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D > Red Hat Israel > > phone: +972-9-7692018 > irc: eedri (on #tlv #rhev-dev #rhev-integ)