|
From: | Manos Pitsidianakis |
Subject: | Re: [Qemu-devel] Throttling groups vs filter nodes |
Date: | Mon, 29 May 2017 23:57:37 +0300 |
User-agent: | NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) |
On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 05:05:17PM +0200, Alberto Garcia wrote:
On Sat 27 May 2017 09:56:03 AM CEST, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:A quirk in the current implementation is that the throttling limits for the group are overwritten by each -drive throttling.group=group0. Limits for all but the last -drive in a group are ignored.- bps or iops != 0 -> set the I/O limits of a throttling group. The selected device is moved to that group if it wasn't there yet. - bps and iops == 0 -> remove a device from a throttling group without touching that group's I/O limits.
These are very unintuitive. However, even without considering backwards compatibility, I think that using -object notation (eg "object-add throttle-group,id=foo,iops=...) is intuitive in the case of groups, but not when you need individual limits for each device as the syntax would be too verbose. Of course the old interface covers that. In any case, is having multiple interfaces a problem or not? And, is using QOM straightforward implementation-wise?
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |