fea(xo-web-6) Specification #1
Conversation
| │ ├── VBD | ||
| │ └── VM_snapshot | ||
| ├── VM_template | ||
| ├── VM_controller |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should I delete it ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nope, but as we said tomorrow in the meeting, it's not at the correct position.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here's a VM_controller object. As I see, it's linked to a pool and a VBD.
Where do you think it's the right position ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's also linked to the host ($container).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see now that a $container is a $host.. So I should move all VM types underneath host, what do you think ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A $container is not always a host, it can be a pool if the VM is not on a specific host (not running and disks on shared SR).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see, so putting it under a host is a bad idea, I think that we should keep it underneath a pool,
README.md
Outdated
| │ ├── VDI_snapshot | ||
| │ └── VDI_unmanaged | ||
| └── Network | ||
| ├── VIF |
README.md
Outdated
| │ └── VDI_unmanaged | ||
| └── Network | ||
| ├── VIF | ||
| └── PIF |
README.md
Outdated
| │ | ||
| ├── VM | ||
| │ ├── VBD | ||
| │ └── VM_snapshot |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Where does this name come from?
Please choose either XAPI or XO types and use them exactly (case and all).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've chosen to work with XO Types, thereby VM_snapshot is an existing type, and it's linked either to a pool or a VM.
To keep homogeneity, I'll move it underneath pool
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've chosen to work with
XO Types, therebyVM_snapshotis an existing type, and it's linked either to apoolor aVM.
Ok, then why is Host capitalize?
To keep homogeneity, I'll move underneath pool
IMHO, it makes sense to have them under the related VM if there is one, otherwise it should be below the host or pool like a normal VM.
No description provided.