This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-API] New API Document and C Bindings

To: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-API] New API Document and C Bindings
From: Ronald Perez <ronpz@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 10:48:53 -0400
Cc: xen-api-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Xen-API <xen-api@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 07:49:11 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20060915143233.GC13130@xxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-api-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Discussion of API issues surrounding Xen <xen-api.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-api@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-api>, <mailto:xen-api-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-api>, <mailto:xen-api-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-api-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 09/15/2006 10:32:33 AM:
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 10:13:45AM -0400, Ronald Perez wrote:
> We're both basically talking about how you represent the different
> capabilities of domains. John is talking in terms of a hierarchy of
> classes, where one class is a sub-set of the other. I'm talking in
> terms of overlapping sets which is a more general representation.
> Fundamentally the important thing we all agree on is the need for a
> way of expressing the differing capabilities of domains.
> > If I'm wrong, someone please clarify the differences between Dan's and
> > John's proposals from both a CIM and Xen API standpoint.
> We are primarily talking about how to express things in the Xen API - this
> does not have to match how its expressed in CIM (provided we expose enough
> information in Xen API for CIM to doing a suitable re-mapping). For example
> in the Xen API we can express all domains the same way, but that doesn't
> stop CIM expressing Domain-0 in a special Host class, seprate from other
> guest VMs if that's appropriate for the CIM model.
> Dan.

Thanks. So if John's "class hierarchy" were really a recursive representation (as mentioned previously), that would be equivalent to your "overlapping sets"? e.g., host_CPUs == VCPUs on a domU.

How do you envision capabilities being represented? By the presence or absence of a field/feature/method or a bitmap or ???

xen-api mailing list