If I am not wrong, we are not reinventing the wheel, in fact we are
asking to support the 'invention' of an efficient means of accessing the
underlying storage on same physical machine. The question is, why to
take a (virtual) long route through network based protocols which will
involve overheads required for network communication when we know that
the required information (folder to share/mount) is on the same physical
machine.
Moreover, let the user decide on the 'policy' whether he wants to use
NFS, CIFS or VirtFS (kind of virtualization aware filesystem) and we
shall only provide the 'mechanism' to do the needful.
regards,
Harsh
On 09/14/2010 03:57 PM, Justin Clift wrote:
On 09/14/2010 07:43 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
The other interesting question to me is actually what todo in the guest
with this. I think for this to be useful we really want some kind of
magic in udev to automatically mount the filesystem based on the
mount tag data, and in particular define some kind of rule / semantics
for the mount tag otherwise every OS is going to interpret this
differently making it a real pain to work with.
Is it reasonable cross platform to then "share" the selected host
directories internally with the guest, using (say) NFS or CIFS?
Picking those two because they cover 90% (guess) of what the guest OS's
already have client software to mount, and we don't have to reinvent the
wheel. ie we can add dependencies on (say) samba or such for people
that want the option.
?
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list