On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 11:12:26AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
On 05/21/2013 10:42 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Perhaps the right thing to do for OpenStack is to allow for a user
> specified configuration file to select things like the default hardware
> models/machine types? Then this could become node configuration instead
> of dynamic configuration.
>
> I think it could be useful for general users too. Every domain requires
> a lot of the same boiler plate bits. I think a lot of configurations
> would benefit from being able to set global domain options.
I have also argued in the past that it would be useful for libvirt to
support the idea of a template, where you can specify a domain XML that
inherits defaults from the template. We've already done things like
this for networking, nwfilter, and even secret management (in domain
XML, you declare that you are using a named network object, and that
network object serves as the template instead of you having to hard-code
all the elements into your domain XML), so we have a design to base it
on. But until someone adds such a feature for libvirt, then OpenStack
should be passing explicit XML to libvirt, and tracking defaults at the
OpenStack layer.
I don't think the idea of a template belongs in libvirt. Creating basic
XML structure with relevant defaults pre-filled for a particular usecase
is something that the libvirt-designer library is aiming to take care of
for applications.
Daniel
--
|:
http://berrange.com -o-
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|:
http://libvirt.org -o-
http://virt-manager.org :|
|:
http://autobuild.org -o-
http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|:
http://entangle-photo.org -o-
http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|