On 09/05/2012 09:08 AM, Bharata B Rao wrote:
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 7:03 PM, Jiri Denemark
<jdenemar(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> @@ -1042,6 +1043,13 @@
>> <attribute name="port">
>> <ref name="unsignedInt"/>
>> </attribute>
>> + <attribute name="transport">
>> + <choice>
>> + <value>socket</value>
>> + <value>unix</value>
>> + <value>rdma</value>
>
> This could be a bit confusing as socket is too generic, after all unix is also
> a socket. Could we change the values "tcp", "unix",
"rdma" or something
> similar depending on what "socket" was supposed to mean?
That is how gluster calls it and hence I am using the same in QEMU and
the same is true here too. This is something for gluster developers to
decide if they want to change socket to something more specific like
tcp as you suggest.
Just because gluster calls it a confusing name does not mean we have to
repeat the confusion in libvirt - it is feasible to have a mapping where
we name it 'tcp' in the XML but map that to 'socket' in the command line
that eventually reaches gluster. The question then becomes whether
using sensible naming in libvirt, but no longer directly mapped to
underlying gluster naming, will be the cause of its own set of headaches.
--
Eric Blake eblake(a)redhat.com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library
http://libvirt.org