[libvirt] [PATCH 1/3] add percentage limit parse and define support for RAM filesystems

[Daniel P. Berrange]

On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 07:40:58PM +0800, Chen Hanxiao wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: libvir-list-bounces at redhat.com
> [mailto:libvir-list-bounces at redhat.com]
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 05:14:43PM +0800, Chen Hanxiao wrote:
> > > > From: Chen Hanxiao <chenhanxiao at cn.fujitsu.com>
> > > >
> > > > This patch enables percentage limit for ram filesystem
> > > >
> > > > <filesystem type='ram'>
> > > >     <source usage='10%'/>
> > > >     <target dir='/mnt'/>
> > > > </filesystem>
> > > >
> > > > Percentage limit would have more priority than size limit.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Chen Hanxiao <chenhanxiao at cn.fujitsu.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  src/conf/domain_conf.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++----
> > > >  src/conf/domain_conf.h |  1 +
> > > >  2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > I'm not really convinced we need this feature. Seems like more code for
> > > little real benefit.
> > >
> > 
> > I think we should follow the style of mount(8). It accepted this style.
> > 
> > And this feature could bring us convenience in config, free us from
> counting the
> > size.
> 
> 	Do we really don't need this feature? Or we may need some code
> optimization?

I just don't see this as a compelling feature. I think it is more important
to have a single canonical representation of memory allocation. User
convenience is something for higher level tools to worry about.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|