On 02/01/2011 08:41 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Jes Sorensen<jes.soren...@redhat.com> wrote:
On 02/01/11 15:34, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Jes Sorensen<jes.soren...@redhat.com> wrote:
I have to admit you lost me here, where do you get that 500ms time from?
Is that the XMLRPC polling time or? I just used the example code from
other agent calls.
500 ms is made up. I was thinking, "what would a reasonable polling
interval be?" and picked a sub-second number.
Can you explain how the timeout in fsfreeze can happen? It's probably
because I don't know the virtagent details.
Ah ok.
From what I understand, the XMLRPC code is setup to timeout if the guest
doesn't reply within a certain amount of time. In that case, the caller
needs to poll to wait for the guest to complete the freeze. This really
should only happen if you have a guest with a large number of very large
file systems. I don't know how likely it is to happen in real life.
Perhaps Michael can confirm that the freeze function continues to
execute after timeout but the client is able to send fsstatus()
requests?
Ahh, yeah there's the confusion: we only execute one RPC at a time, so a
polling function for a previous RPC won't work unless that RPC is being
done concurrently, via fork()ing or something and communicating status
via some method of IPC.
I touched on possible approaches to dealing with this in the response I
just sent to this patch.
Stefan
