On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 12:18 AM Nir Soffer wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 3:22 PM Eric Blake wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 03:21:21AM +0200, Nir Soffer wrote:
>> > Add unit tests and benchmarks for AioBuffer. The tests are trivial but
>> > they server as running documentation, and they
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 6:49 PM Richard W.M. Jones
wrote:
> To connect via a proxy you must now use “-oo rhv-proxy”. This is
> usually slower and not needed.
>
> Fixes: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2033096
> Thanks: Nir Soffer
> ---
> output/output_rhv_upload.ml | 4 ++--
> 1
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 6:49 PM Richard W.M. Jones
wrote:
> This simply replaces the existing -oo rhv-direct option with a new -oo
> rhv-proxy option. Note that using this option "bare" (ie. just “-oo
> rhv-proxy”) does nothing in the current commit because the default is
> still to use the
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 7:01 PM Richard W.M. Jones
wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 06:38:55PM +0200, Nir Soffer wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 5:54 PM Richard W.M. Jones
> wrote:
> >
> > Pick the nbdcopy --requests parameter to target an implicit buffer
> > size of 64M inside
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 06:38:55PM +0200, Nir Soffer wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 5:54 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> Pick the nbdcopy --requests parameter to target an implicit buffer
> size of 64M inside nbdcopy. However don't set nbdcopy --request < 64.
>
> If request_size
This simply replaces the existing -oo rhv-direct option with a new -oo
rhv-proxy option. Note that using this option "bare" (ie. just “-oo
rhv-proxy”) does nothing in the current commit because the default is
still to use the proxy.
Related: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2033096
To connect via a proxy you must now use “-oo rhv-proxy”. This is
usually slower and not needed.
Fixes: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2033096
Thanks: Nir Soffer
---
output/output_rhv_upload.ml | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git
Fix for https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2033096
___
Libguestfs mailing list
Libguestfs@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libguestfs
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 5:54 PM Richard W.M. Jones
wrote:
> Pick the nbdcopy --requests parameter to target an implicit buffer
> size of 64M inside nbdcopy. However don't set nbdcopy --request < 64.
>
> If request_size == 256K (the default) => requests = 256
> If request_size == 8M => requests
Pick the nbdcopy --requests parameter to target an implicit buffer
size of 64M inside nbdcopy. However don't set nbdcopy --request < 64.
If request_size == 256K (the default) => requests = 256
If request_size == 8M => requests = 64 (buffer size 512M)
---
v2v/v2v.ml | 13 +
1 file
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 01:43:01PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Predictably this makes no difference to the current code since nbdcopy
> is using 256K requests. I will do some real testing when Nir pushes
> his change here:
>
>
On 02/15/22 14:43, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> We know that VDDK has problems handling very large single requests.
> It may cause out of memory errors on the server unless a relatively
> obscure server-side configuration change is made. With modular
> virt-v2v we won't necessarily have fine
We know that VDDK has problems handling very large single requests.
It may cause out of memory errors on the server unless a relatively
obscure server-side configuration change is made. With modular
virt-v2v we won't necessarily have fine control over who is connecting
to the input socket and
Predictably this makes no difference to the current code since nbdcopy
is using 256K requests. I will do some real testing when Nir pushes
his change here:
https://listman.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2022-February/msg00188.html
Nir - do you want to actually increase that back to 8M? In
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 12:14:11PM +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> On 02/15/22 11:43, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 04:08:21PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >> On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 04:52:17PM +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> >>> On 02/14/22 14:01, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On 02/15/22 11:43, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 04:08:21PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 04:52:17PM +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>>> On 02/14/22 14:01, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
But nbdcopy needs to be reworked to make the input and output
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 10:33:18AM +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> on up-to-date Fedora 35, "test-mdadm.sh" in the libguestfs test suite is
> failing like this:
>
> *stdin*:32: libguestfs: error: md_create: mdadm: r1t2: mdadm: specifying
> chunk size is forbidden for this level
>
> I've
On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 04:08:21PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 04:52:17PM +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> > On 02/14/22 14:01, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > But nbdcopy needs to be reworked to make the input and output requests
> > > separate, so that nbdcopy will
Hi,
on up-to-date Fedora 35, "test-mdadm.sh" in the libguestfs test suite is
failing like this:
*stdin*:32: libguestfs: error: md_create: mdadm: r1t2: mdadm: specifying
chunk size is forbidden for this level
I've searched the web for the error message, but only found
19 matches
Mail list logo
