On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 01:21:46PM +0000, John Levon wrote: > On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 12:28:47PM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > > No, surely we should fix the XML to represent it, and then it /would/ > > > work. Must be better than another identical API. > > > > Historically there has been a bit of a debate about this. It's not > > clear if the XML is meant to represent static configuration about the > > domain (eg. what disks it has), versus administration of the domain > > (how vCPUs are pinned for example). > > I think it's become evident that the XML represents the dynamic state of > the domain - for example, the whole code is structured around things > like the console pty being available. This would include administrative > actions, especially ones that should be persisted. > > Put another way, there's nowhere else for it to go! > > Yes, it would have been nice for a clear separation between the three > things (hypervisor-agnostic description of a guest 'profile', i.e. > image.rng, configuration of a domain, and runtime state of a domain), > but it cannot be changed now. Furthermore, the API does not include the > notion of persistence, sadly. Yup, I totally agree with you. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat http://et.redhat.com/~rjones virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines. Tiny program with many powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc. http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top -- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list