On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 07:54:54AM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
On 02/19/2014 04:06 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
FWIW, for the initial 'virConnectOpen' API I think it probably would be worthwhile us supporting a standardized "timeout" URI parameter. That way if the remote service doesn't respond at all for some reason users can have fine control. That's a sufficiently targetted use case that it'd be easy to do, compared to timeouts for arbitrary APIs.
Indeed - having a timeout on the initial connection attempt is much more useful than worrying about individual APIs when you have a responsive connection, since it is the indeterminate time of establishing a remote connection that may be the problem here. But does that mean yet another C API? We already have virConnectOpen{,ReadOnly,Auth}. Or are you envisioning this just in the language bindings (Java, python - but not C)?
I was actually thinking of (ab)using the URI for this eg qemu+tcp://somehost/system?timeout=60 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 :|