Adding Memory Overcommitment Manager (MOM) to oVirt

[Alexander Graf]

On 27.09.2011, at 15:43, Michael D Day wrote:

> > > So what's the benefit of a separate MOM vs an integrated MOM inside
> > > of VDSM?
> > 
> > I'd agree this is really VM policy which should be handled by VDSM.
> 
> It's pretty simple. MOM does something valuable today that VDSM doesn't do. An integrated MOM inside of VDSM doesn't exist. If VDSM wants to incorporate MOM that's great. But how is the existence of VDSM an argument against contributing MOM source code to the oVirt community? Am I missing something?

Oh, sorry if that's what it felt like I was suggesting. It's not at all. I was just wondering if it makes more sense to integrate MOM into VDSM vs. keeping both separate projects that don't share code.

> On a related point, there are good examples that argue for consolidating function inside a single daemon, and there are good counterexamples. It's not always true that every node policy function should be integrated within a single daemon. It probably makes sense in this case. But again, VDSM doesn't do what MOM does today, which is another argument in favor of contributing MOM and letting the community work with it.

I fully agree. This is more of a "big picture" discussion again, not a nack or anything even remotely resembling such :)


Alex