A good news - sorry I wasn't aware of the current stance on arbitrary parameters and can say I completely agree with it.
Scheduler Parameters API sounds interesting - i'll see if I can find time to look into it - if there's anyone who already knows how it works that sees this as a quick patch though, massive points Henri Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 10:23:59PM +0100, Henri Cook wrote: > >> Hey all, >> >> I'd quite like the ability to nice my KVM process, on a home basis this >> stops my Windows VM locking up my linux desktop when it's under load (or >> at least limits it) and in a commercial setting it might be nice to >> offer CPU priority to other customers or company backup-services over >> customer VPS instances for example. >> >> How does it sound? Any thoughts? >> >> A quick chat in #virt revealed that a method for adding generic KVM >> options has been under discussion for ages - I thought i'd throw my two >> cents in, what about some sort of expression with variables like: >> > > A method for adding arbitrary KVM options will never be merged in > libvirt.... > > >> <cmdstring>{cmd} {options}</cmdstring> (default) >> >> for my nice proposition you could: >> >> <cmdstring>/usr/bin/nice {cmd} {options}</cmdstring> >> > > The intent of libvirt is to provide APIs which can be used across all > hypervisors. Taking the 'nice' example, this is really a schedular > parameter. If we added ability to set 'nice -20' in the XML for KVM, > there is no way we could possibly implement this for Xen. > > So the goal is to find a consistent API representation. Fortunately we > do already have a 'schedular parameters' API in libvirt - we simply > need to decide how to implement this for KVM - a 'nice' setting is > certainly one schedular tunable we'd likely want to support. > > So if someone wants to implenment the schedular parameters driver API > for KVM patches welcomed... > > Regards, > Daniel >
-- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list