On 06/14/2012 01:35 AM, Pavel Hrdina wrote: > Signed-off-by: Pavel Hrdina <phrd...@redhat.com> > ---
> +++ b/qapi-schema.json
> @@ -1169,6 +1169,21 @@
> { 'command': 'block_resize', 'data': { 'device': 'str', 'size': 'int' }}
>
> ##
> +# @commit
> +#
> +# Commit changes to the disk images (if -snapshot is used) or backing files.
> +#
> +# @device: the name of the device or the "all" to commit all devices
> +#
> +# Returns: nothing on success
> +# If @device is not a valid block device, DeviceNotFound
> +# If a long-running operation is using the device, DeviceInUse
> +#
> +# Since: 1.2
> +##
> +{ 'command': 'commit', 'data': { 'device': 'str' }}
Should we use this as an opportunity to make the command more powerful?
For example, integrating this with the 'transaction' command or a block
job queried by 'query-block-jobs' to track its progress would be useful.
Also, suppose I have A <- B <- C. Does 'commit' only do one layer (C
into B), or all layers (B and C into A)? That argues that we need an
optional parameter that says how deep to commit (committing C into B
only to repeat and commit B into A is more time-consuming than directly
committing both B and C into A to start with). When a commit is
complete, which file is backing the device - is it still C (which
continues to diverge, but now from the point of the commit) or does qemu
pivot things to have the device now backed by B (and C can be discarded,
particularly true if changes are now going into B which invalidate C).
--
Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
