Re: [libvirt] [RFC PATCH 0/8 v2] Summary on block IO throttle

On 10/28/2011 02:59 AM, Lei Li wrote: >>Given that the XML is named <iotune> under <disk>, we should probably >>name the virsh command 'blkiotune' or 'disk-iotune', not 'blkiothrottle'. >> >Hi Eric, we used<iothrottle> first, I changed it since Daniel P. Berrange >proposed<iotune> for per-disk element instead of<iothrottle> when we >discussed at RFC V1. > >The command 'blkiotune' already exist, supported the cgroups >blkio-controller, which handles proportional shares and throughput/iops >limits on host block devices, global to the domain, but blkio throttling >is specified per-disk and can vary across multiple disks. They are >different >two mechanism. > >So how about use<iothrottle> again? :) For extensibility, I _don't_ want to hardcode 'throttle' into the name; the goal here is that we want this xml element to contain all tuning parameters that are appropriate for a single disk, which could be more than just throttling. So using 'virsh disk-iotune' sounds like the best name for the virsh side of the command.