On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 02:58:07PM +0200, Daniel Veillard wrote: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523639 > > feature request which makes sense to me, the simple patch attached > seems to be sufficient, one can define and have the description back > in the dump. Doesn't try to keep the location of the tag, it always > get serialized after <uuid>. > The only drawbacks I can think of are: > - others XML formats may require the same, but honnestly it's trivial I wonder if there's any value in putting it inside a <metadata> element, so if we add more official metadata fields those can be grouped in the same place. It also helps to make it clear that it is not going to have a functional effect on the domain like the rest of the elements do. If a hypervisor backend only had a single 'description' field in its native config format, we could even consider the storing the entire <metadata> element in that one description field allowing encoding of arbitrary metadata beyond that supported by the HV in question. > - machine generated description (for example if the history log of > a domain gets stored there) could grow a lot and I wonder if we > have a hard limit on the size when transmitting xml descriptions The remote protocol has a arbitrary 256 KB limit on all data in a single message: const REMOTE_MESSAGE_PAYLOAD_MAX = 262120; We can increase that limit at any time we like without impacting ABI - its just a limit to avoid denial of service attacks from stupidly large messages Daniel -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :| -- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list