On 08.01.2013 16:42, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> On 08.01.2013 16:24, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 10:37:19AM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
>>> Currently, if there's no hard memory limit defined for a domain,
>>> libvirt tries to calculate one, based on domain definition and
On 08.01.2013 16:46, Dave Allan wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 04:42:00PM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
>> On 08.01.2013 16:24, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 10:37:19AM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
Currently, if there's no hard memory limit defined for a domain,
>>
On 08.01.2013 16:24, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 10:37:19AM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
>> Currently, if there's no hard memory limit defined for a domain,
>> libvirt tries to calculate one, based on domain definition and magic
>> equation and set it upon the domain start
On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 04:42:00PM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> On 08.01.2013 16:24, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 10:37:19AM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> >> Currently, if there's no hard memory limit defined for a domain,
> >> libvirt tries to calculate one, based o
On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 10:37:19AM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> Currently, if there's no hard memory limit defined for a domain,
> libvirt tries to calculate one, based on domain definition and magic
> equation and set it upon the domain startup. The rationale behind was,
> if there's a memory
Currently, if there's no hard memory limit defined for a domain,
libvirt tries to calculate one, based on domain definition and magic
equation and set it upon the domain startup. The rationale behind was,
if there's a memory leak or exploit in qemu, we should prevent the
host system trashing. Howev
