On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 06:27:39AM -0400, Daniel Veillard wrote:
On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 06:22:58AM -0400, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 04:08:50AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 04:05:53AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > > Since the previous patch allows the remote daemon to serve all the
functions
> > > of the current Xen Proxy driver, this patch simply removes the Xen proxy
> > > and its driver.
> >
> > Oh I should mention, I've only done minimal testing on this so far. I need
> > to do more extensive testing to ensure I didn't miss any edge cases in the
> > way apps were using the proxy.
>
Just thinking about it, maybe test that the change doesn't end up doing
too much performance degradation. For example if instead of doing RPC to
proxy + hypercall, we end up doing RPC to daemon + PolicyKit (DBus RPC
+ lookup) + say xend access, this may introduce some regression. I assume
all calls previously serviced by the proxy would still be allowed freely
without PolicyKit checking, right ?
I'll check the performance again. Last time I did this, using UNIX sockets
with the remote driver was pretty damn good. The policykit DBus hit is a
one-time hit when the socket is opened, so negligable & no impact per-RPC
call.
Dan.
--
|=- Red Hat, Engineering, Emerging Technologies, Boston. +1 978 392 2496 -=|
|=- Perl modules:
http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ -=|
|=- Projects:
http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/ -=|
|=- GnuPG: 7D3B9505 F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 -=|