[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: generalising oxenstored for unix nodes too

On Feb 15, 2012, at 10:45 AM, "Anil Madhavapeddy" <anil@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 15 Feb 2012, at 17:37, Thomas Gazagnaire wrote:
>>> Ok, just going with making it Lwt+functor for now then, as is
>>> the quickest. I had a vague idea that we might be able to hang
>>> arbitrary continuations as the value for an entry, rather than just
>>> strings, so they could be woken up by the scheduler.
>>> However, thats step 2 :)  Just having it working in a stub domain
>>> for now would be most useful.
>> You don't need lwt to make it work as stub donain, as the scheduler is 
>> hand-made and do not use threads. But indeed, that would be a nice 
>> improvement (but do you really need that?)
> It's hard to compose two blocking events without it. So strictly
> speaking you could do a single oxenstored without Lwt, but even a
> blocking console ring would introduce problems then.
> I suspect in production that an oxenstored will also need a management
> netfront or a logging ring of some kind, and so Lwt will be needed for
> that.

I agree - logging to a console ring would be essential. We can then tell 
xenconsoled to log the console output directly to syslog. We'd want that to be 
non-blocking or the system might grind to a halt under load (it's probably 
better to drop some logs and report you've done so and to continue, if the 
logging buffer fills up)




Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.