[Users] R: tuned profile for Centos hosts -- new Bugzilla orRegression

[Amedeo Salvati]

Hi Ted,

I'm interested to on this tuned rhs-virtualization profile... where I can find it? And what macro differences has against virtual-host profile?

Best regards
a


Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 22:09:44 +0000
From: Ted Miller <tmiller at hcjb.org>
To: oVirt Mailing List <users at ovirt.org>
Subject: [Users] tuned profile for Centos hosts -- new Bugzilla or
Regression
Message-ID:
<a584ee1c0d4e40a2ae295cf23111628b at DM2PR05MB320.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

I posted a script (a while back) to get oVirt running on Centos hosts.

One of the items in it has to do with what "tuned" profile to use.  At the time I first ran into it, this was a fatal error.  It is now just a warning, so it does not prevent installing a host.  But, as a warning, a lot of people are probably missing it.

When using Centos 6 as the host OS, the script tries to install a "rhs-virtualization" profile.  That profile is not included in Centos.  I substituted the "virtual-host" profile.

I believe that this may be a regression as a result of Bugzilla 987293<https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=987293>;, where "rhs-virtualization" was substituted for "virtual-host" for RHEV + RHS.  I am guessing that whatever is used as a switch to determine RHEV + RHS is also shoving Centos into that same path, which is not appropriate.

My suggestion would be to write the script so that it uses "rhs-virtualization" when present, and if it is not present, then it falls back to "virtual-host".  (I don't know what (if any) differences there are between the two profiles.)

Should I open a new bug, make a comment on 987293, or take some other path?

Ted Miller



Inviato da Tablet Samsung
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20140107/bb4881cd/attachment-0001.html>