[Users] Could I add the VirtualBox to the oVirt?
--__=_Part_Boundary_002_006217.025725 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SGksIEkgd2FudCB0byBhZGQgdGhlIFZpcnR1YWxCb3ggdG8gdGhlIG9WaXJ0Lg0KV2hhdCBjYW4g SSBkbyBmb3IgdGhhdD8= --__=_Part_Boundary_002_006217.025725 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PCFET0NUWVBFIEhUTUwgUFVCTElDICItLy9XM0MvL0RURCBIVE1MIDQuMCBUcmFuc2l0aW9uYWwv L0VOIj4NCjxIVE1MPjxIRUFEPg0KPFNUWUxFIHR5cGU9dGV4dC9jc3M+IDwhLS1AaW1wb3J0IHVy bChzY3JvbGxiYXIuY3NzKTsgLS0+PC9TVFlMRT4NCg0KPE1FVEEgY29udGVudD0idGV4dC9odG1s OyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04IiBodHRwLWVxdWl2PUNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZT4NCjxTVFlMRT4JCQlCTE9D S1FVT1RFe21hcmdpbi1Ub3A6IDBweDsgbWFyZ2luLUJvdHRvbTogMHB4OyBtYXJnaW4tTGVmdDog MmVtfQkJCWJvZHl7Rk9OVC1TSVpFOjEyLjFwdDsgQ09MT1I6IzAwMTsgRk9OVC1GQU1JTFk65a6L 5L2TLHNlcmlmO30JCTwvU1RZTEU+DQoNCjxNRVRBIG5hbWU9R0VORVJBVE9SIGNvbnRlbnQ9Ik1T SFRNTCAxMS4wMC45NjAwLjE2Mzg0Ij48QkFTRSANCnRhcmdldD1fYmxhbms+PC9IRUFEPg0KPEJP RFkgDQpzdHlsZT0iQk9SREVSLUxFRlQtV0lEVEg6IDBweDsgQk9SREVSLVJJR0hULVdJRFRIOiAw cHg7IEJPUkRFUi1CT1RUT00tV0lEVEg6IDBweDsgTUFSR0lOOiAxMnB4OyBMSU5FLUhFSUdIVDog MS4zOyBCT1JERVItVE9QLVdJRFRIOiAwcHgiIA0KbWFyZ2luaGVpZ2h0PSIwIiBtYXJnaW53aWR0 aD0iMCI+PFNUQVRJT05FUlk+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIGNvbG9yPSMwMDAwMDAgc2l6ZT0yIGZhY2U9 5b6u6L2v6ZuF6buRPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBjb2xvcj0jMDAwMDAwIHNpemU9MiBmYWNlPeW+rui9 r+mbhem7kT5IaSwgSSB3YW50IHRvIGFkZCB0aGUgVmlydHVhbEJveCB0byANCnRoZSBvVmlydC48 L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIGNvbG9yPSMwMDAwMDAgc2l6ZT0yIGZhY2U95b6u6L2v 6ZuF6buRPldoYXQgY2FuIEkgZG8gZm9yIA0KdGhhdD88L0ZPTlQ+PC9GT05UPjwvRElWPjwvRElW PjwvU1RBVElPTkVSWT48L0JPRFk+PC9IVE1MPg== --__=_Part_Boundary_002_006217.025725--
--__=_Part_Boundary_006_029161.022954 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SGkuDQpXaGVuIHdlIGFkZCBhIG5ldyBob3N0LGVuZ2luZSBjYW4gaW5zdGFsbGVkIHRoZSB2ZHNt IG9uIHRoZSBob3N0IGFuZCB2ZHNtIGNhbiBjYWxsIHRoZSBpbnRlcmZhY2Ugb2YgbGlidmlydC4N ClRoZSBsaWJ2aXJ0IHN1cHBvcnQgVmlydHVhbEJveC5CdXQgdGhlIFZEU00gdXNlcyBxZW11LWt2 bS4NCkkgd2FudCB0byBsZXQgdmRzbSBjYW4gdXNlIGxpYnZpcnQgdG8gY2FsbCB0aGUgaW50ZXJm YWNlIG9mIFZpdHVhbEJveC4NClRoYW5rIHlvdS4= --__=_Part_Boundary_006_029161.022954 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PCFET0NUWVBFIEhUTUwgUFVCTElDICItLy9XM0MvL0RURCBIVE1MIDQuMCBUcmFuc2l0aW9uYWwv L0VOIj4NCjxIVE1MPjxIRUFEPg0KPFNUWUxFIHR5cGU9dGV4dC9jc3M+IDwhLS1AaW1wb3J0IHVy bChzY3JvbGxiYXIuY3NzKTsgLS0+PC9TVFlMRT4NCg0KPE1FVEEgY29udGVudD0idGV4dC9odG1s OyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04IiBodHRwLWVxdWl2PUNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZT4NCjxTVFlMRT4JCQlib2R5 e0ZPTlQtU0laRToxMnB0OyBGT05ULUZBTUlMWTrlrovkvZMsc2VyaWY7fQkJPC9TVFlMRT4NCg0K PE1FVEEgbmFtZT1HRU5FUkFUT1IgY29udGVudD0iTVNIVE1MIDExLjAwLjk2MDAuMTYzODQiPjxC QVNFIA0KdGFyZ2V0PV9ibGFuaz48L0hFQUQ+DQo8Qk9EWSANCnN0eWxlPSJCT1JERVItTEVGVC1X SURUSDogMHB4OyBCT1JERVItUklHSFQtV0lEVEg6IDBweDsgQk9SREVSLUJPVFRPTS1XSURUSDog MHB4OyBNQVJHSU46IDEycHg7IExJTkUtSEVJR0hUOiAxLjM7IEJPUkRFUi1UT1AtV0lEVEg6IDBw eCIgDQptYXJnaW5oZWlnaHQ9IjAiIG1hcmdpbndpZHRoPSIwIj4NCjxESVY+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT0y IGZhY2U95b6u6L2v6ZuF6buRPkhpLjwvRk9OVD48L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT0yIGZh Y2U95b6u6L2v6ZuF6buRPldoZW4gd2UgYWRkIGEgbmV3IGhvc3QsZW5naW5lIGNhbiBpbnN0YWxs ZWQgdGhlIHZkc20gDQpvbiB0aGUgaG9zdCBhbmQgdmRzbSBjYW4gY2FsbCB0aGUgaW50ZXJmYWNl IG9mIGxpYnZpcnQuPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTIgZmFjZT3lvq7ova/p m4Xpu5E+VGhlIGxpYnZpcnQgc3VwcG9ydCBWaXJ0dWFsQm94LkJ1dCB0aGUgVkRTTSB1c2VzIA0K cWVtdS1rdm0uPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTIgZmFjZT3lvq7ova/pm4Xp u5E+SSB3YW50IHRvIGxldCB2ZHNtIGNhbiB1c2UgbGlidmlydCB0byBjYWxsIHRoZSANCmludGVy ZmFjZSBvZiBWaXR1YWxCb3guPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTIgZmFjZT3l vq7ova/pm4Xpu5E+VGhhbmsgeW91LjwvRk9OVD48L0RJVj48L0JPRFk+PC9IVE1MPg== --__=_Part_Boundary_006_029161.022954--
On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 02:00:10PM +0800, hackxay wrote:
Hi. When we add a new host,engine can installed the vdsm on the host and vdsm can call the interface of libvirt. The libvirt support VirtualBox.But the VDSM uses qemu-kvm. I want to let vdsm can use libvirt to call the interface of VitualBox. Thank you.
This would make a great feature (and I'd add Linux container to the list), but it's an expensive one. Introducing it into vdsm is a challange. But the complex part is maintaining and testing it for years to come. Personally, I'd prefer to focus on KVM. Higer in my portability wishlist are non-Fedora distribution and non-x86_64 cpus. However if someone volunteers to port vdsm to another technology (and maintain the code so that it does not rot), I would be delighted. Dan.
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------040400080701000207050401 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11/08/2013 01:00 AM, hackxay wrote:
Hi. When we add a new host,engine can installed the vdsm on the host and vdsm can call the interface of libvirt. The libvirt support VirtualBox.But the VDSM uses qemu-kvm. I want to let vdsm can use libvirt to call the interface of VitualBox.
I agree that it is unfortunate that we have limited the power of libvirt in terms of the number of backends it can manage when integrating it into oVirt.**Extending to VirtualBox would be an interesting project, but I'm not sure how valuable it would be. As a long-time user of VirtualBox I found it to be slower than KVM. I guess it could allow people to use non-Linux Nodes. Like Dan said, a lot of work there so the payoff would have to be big enough to justify it. On the other hand, I think it would have far greater impact in terms of number of use cases/users if we expanded VDSM to manage VMware ESX. VMware is still arguably the market leader for virtualization. At the very least, this would then provide a migration path for anybody wanting to move away from VMware to oVirt (or, perhaps, visa-versa if we don't do a good enough job with oVirt ;). Since the Nodes would effectively still be restricted to Linux the task should be easier than e.g. supporting a Node consisting of Windows+VirtualBox. As with VirtualBox, there's no SPICE capability for VMware, so in addition to the VDSM work the User Portal should be extended to support e.g. VMware Horizon View Client. -Bob P.S. If we *did* support VirtualBox, the User Portal should be extended to broker VNC connections since that's one way to connect to a console with VBox. That wouldn't be a bad project in itself, and would have value even without VirtualBox. --------------040400080701000207050401 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <html> <head> <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> <br> <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 11/08/2013 01:00 AM, hackxay wrote:<br> </div> <blockquote cite="mid:38f27188.46c5.142364bf261.Coremail.hackxay@163.com" type="cite"> <style type="text/css"> <!--@import url(scrollbar.css); --></style> <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> <style> body{FONT-SIZE:12pt; FONT-FAMILY:宋体,serif;} </style> <meta name="GENERATOR" content="MSHTML 11.00.9600.16384"> <base target="_blank"> <div><font size="2" face="微软雅黑">Hi.</font></div> <div><font size="2" face="微软雅黑">When we add a new host,engine can installed the vdsm on the host and vdsm can call the interface of libvirt.</font></div> <div><font size="2" face="微软雅黑">The libvirt support VirtualBox.But the VDSM uses qemu-kvm.</font></div> <div><font size="2" face="微软雅黑">I want to let vdsm can use libvirt to call the interface of VitualBox.</font><br> </div> </blockquote> <br> I agree that it is unfortunate that we have limited the power of libvirt in terms of the number of backends it can manage when integrating it into oVirt.<b> </b>Extending to VirtualBox would be an interesting project, but I'm not sure how valuable it would be. As a long-time user of VirtualBox I found it to be slower than KVM. I guess it could allow people to use non-Linux Nodes. Like Dan said, a lot of work there so the payoff would have to be big enough to justify it.<br> <br> On the other hand, I think it would have far greater impact in terms of number of use cases/users if we expanded VDSM to manage VMware ESX. VMware is still arguably the market leader for virtualization. At the very least, this would then provide a migration path for anybody wanting to move away from VMware to oVirt (or, perhaps, visa-versa if we don't do a good enough job with oVirt ;). Since the Nodes would effectively still be restricted to Linux the task should be easier than e.g. supporting a Node consisting of Windows+VirtualBox. As with VirtualBox, there's no SPICE capability for VMware, so in addition to the VDSM work the User Portal should be extended to support e.g. VMware Horizon View Client.<br> <br> -Bob<br> <br> P.S. If we *did* support VirtualBox, the User Portal should be extended to broker VNC connections since that's one way to connect to a console with VBox. That wouldn't be a bad project in itself, and would have value even without VirtualBox.<br> <br> </body> </html> --------------040400080701000207050401--
participants (4)
-
Bob Doolittle -
Dan Kenigsberg -
hackxay -
Itamar Heim