Conversation
Signed-off-by: Anthoine Bourgeois <anthoine.bourgeois@vates.tech>
Signed-off-by: Anthoine Bourgeois <anthoine.bourgeois@vates.tech>
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 21473266724Details
💛 - Coveralls |
| debug "xenstore-write %s = %Ld" sectors_path new_size; | ||
| xs.Xs.write sectors_path (Int64.to_string new_size); | ||
| debug "xenstore-write %s" resize_path; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think there's any need for these xenstore write debug lines, writes get logged by xenstored anyway
| , "Online VDI resize is not supported by any of the storage backends." | ||
| ) | ||
| ] | ||
| call ~name:"resize_online" ~in_oss_since:None ~lifecycle:[] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This change will cause problems, we can't simply rewrite history. we have to think of a way to reintroduce this
| | `resize | `resize_online -> | ||
| Some Vdi_resize | ||
| | `update -> | ||
| Some Vdi_update | ||
| | `resize_online -> | ||
| Some Vdi_resize_online |
|
There's barely any context in the opening message and the commit messages explaining the needs to reintroduce this feature. I expect this feature was removed for several reasons, and we should prepare to reason why it needs to be reintroduced to explain to upstream maintainers |
|
This works needs to be rebased on top of the 26.1-lcm branch |
| in | ||
| List.iter | ||
| (fun vbd_record -> | ||
| let vbd_uuid = (field_lookup vbd_record.fields "uuid").get () in |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is slightly unusual to use the UUID for lookup and it would be more paradigmatic to use the reference.
5 participants
Re-enable resize online feature.
This PR is a way to discuss how can I improve code and is it at a level of upstream acceptance?
2 commits:
Tested on a FileSR.
May I have your opinion?