On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 01:48:19PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > On 03/23/2010 01:23 PM, Chris Lalancette wrote: > >>> } virDomainSnapshotDeactivate; > >>> >> int virDomainSnapshotDeactivate(virDomainSnapshotPtr snapshot, > >>> >> unsigned int flags); > >> > > >> > I'm not sure if virDomainSnapshotDeactivate is a good name. > > I agree it's not a great name. I didn't like Dan's original > > proposal of "virDomainSnapshotDelete", though, since it doesn't > > exactly seem to fit the situation either. Any more suggestions for > > a name? > > I agree that Delete is misleading, but it kind of works (as long as you > remember that in the merge case, the data being deleted is not the > snapshot parameter that you passed to the function call, but the delta > in state between the more-recent content that is being rolled back to > the state it was earlier during the snapshot). Maybe some other ideas > would work: virDomainSnapshotCleanup or virDomainSnapshotRecycle? After > all, the goal of this API is to reduce the amount of storage pool being > used to store snapshot images. The reason for calling this "Delete" is that we are deleting thue virDomainSnapshotPtr object instance - it ceases to exist after this operation is called. 'Delete' is not refering to the data itself, the flags determine what happens to the data. Regards, Daniel -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://deltacloud.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