On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 15:38:22 +0100, Milan Zamazal wrote: > [Starting to move to the development list.] > > Milan Zamazal <mzamazal@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > >> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 12:38:24 +0100, Milan Zamazal wrote: > >>> > >>> There are basically two problems: > >>> > >>> - When the job completion callback is called, I need to distinguish what > >>> kind of job was it to perform the appropriate actions. It would be > >>> easier if I knew the job type directly in the callback (no need to > >>> coordinate anything), but "external" job tracking is also possible. > >> > >> An immediate answer would be: "don't rely on the completion callback and > >> just check the return value of the API which started the job", but I > >> guess you want it because checking the return value is not possible when > >> the process which started the job is not running anymore as described > >> below. > > > > Well, avoiding using the completion callback is probably OK for me. > > Thinking about it more, it's not very nice: I have to use the callback > to get the completed job stats (I'm not guaranteed the domain still > exists on the source host when I ask it for the stats explicitly) *and* > to track the jobs outside the callback to know whether the callback is > related to the type of domain jobs I'm going to handle. > > Although not absolutely necessary, it would be much nicer if the job > type was identified in the callback. The job completed event uses type parameters so adding a new parameter describing the just completed job should not be a problem. Jirka -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
