From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Bamvor Jian Zhang" Subject: Re: [RFC] about libxl snapshot Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 01:43:42 -0600 Message-ID: <5342E3CE020000300003D412@soto.provo.novell.com> References: <533D74E90200003000029A3E@soto.provo.novell.com> <21309.28574.284304.16673@mariner.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <21309.28574.284304.16673@mariner.uk.xensource.com> Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com Cc: Anthony.perard@citrix.com, Ian.Campbell@citrix.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org hi, ian "Ian Jackson" writen > > Bamvor Jian Zhang writes ("[RFC] about libxl snapshot"): > > our plan about snapshot is: > > 1, basic disk snapshot support(internal snapshot, qdisk as backend). > > ALREADY SENT. > > Right, see my comments on that. I'm not sure what feature it > provides, apart from something that could be done with qemku-img. yes. thanks for your review. basically this patch want to provide some api for vm snapshot. is it ok if i send current patch plus vm snapshot patch together, and leave some advanced feature alone? i mean support create, delete, list and revert for vm snapshot(only support internal disk snapshot). > > 2, vm snapshot(memory save, snapshot the whole snapshot with transaction qmp > > opeartion, only support internal disk snapshot at this step. > > in this step, we plan to add the vm snapshot record in xenstore in domain in > > order to management the status of vm snapshot. > > I'm not sure what you mean by "add the vm snapshot record in > xenstore". I don't know what "vm snapshot record" is exactly. If you > mean the domain save state it's far too big for xenstore. sorry for confuse. i mean store the vm snapshot information, such as name of snapshot, creation time. regards bamvor > > > question: > > in GSOC2013, there is a requirement: "Add VM snapshot functionalities to libxl > > save/restore and migration functions". is it mean add a flag to create snapshot > > in save, revert snapshot in restore besides the dedicated vm snapshot command? > > or just implement the snapshot in save, restore and migration? > > it might be more clear for user if there is a dedicated snapshot command. > > I agree that a dedicated command might be clearer. This is a matter > for the implementor to think about and decide in consultation with the > community. I don't think the 2013 GSOC requirement was intended to > specify an xl UI. > > > 3, some "advanced" feature such driver-mirror, support other backend. > > > > when i prepare to send this out, i found that there is a GSOC project during > > community review this week. i am sorry about i do not send this discussion > > eariler. sorry if i break the plan of xen community. > > We welcome contributions from anyone, whether within GSOC or without. > Sadly sometimes that means things come in parallel, which can involve > duplicated work. We'll know fairly soon which GSOC projects have been > accepted. > > Ian.