2:07 a.m.
--__=_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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--__=_Part_Boundary_002_006217.025725--
1 a.m.
--__=_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--
10:21 a.m.
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.
10:45 a.m.
New subject: [Users] Adding VMware (was Re: Could I add the VirtualBox to the oVirt?)
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--
4062
days inactive
4063
days old
4 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Bob Doolittle -
Dan Kenigsberg -
hackxay -
Itamar Heim