Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2023 10:08:19 -0800 From: Rob Wing <rob.fx907@gmail.com> To: Matthew Grooms <mgrooms@shrew.net> Cc: virtualization@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BHYVE SNAPSHOT image format proposal Message-ID: <CAF3%2Bn_cc5ZpGsKCff%2Bu-rSjnJn%2BN1jdu9KW0Y5b6n_TieMsfng@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <79fabe94-b800-c713-48ea-518da1f74e4d@shrew.net> References: <67FDC8A8-86A6-4AE4-85F0-FF7BEF9F2F06@gmail.com> <6b98da58a5bd8e83bc466efa20b5a900298210aa.camel@FreeBSD.org> <8387AC83-6667-48E5-A3FA-11475EA96A5F@gmail.com> <d92db9bfbea181d6eb9d57b579d67e8e118ef4de.camel@FreeBSD.org> <986A83D8-E0E0-4030-9369-A5B3500E27C6@gmail.com> <79fabe94-b800-c713-48ea-518da1f74e4d@shrew.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--00000000000053d1c006007652af Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 9:40=E2=80=AFAM Matthew Grooms <mgrooms@shrew.net> = wrote: > > I see a need to define a format for bhyve so it's possible to mix > different sections and encodings inside a unified stream. But all the > data in your nvlist example above can be easily be represented as text. > We already have JSON, YAML, XML, etc ... By adopting an preexisting > format, we could retain the snapshot structure instead of lifting it up > into the stream format. Even if we decide to break the structure up into > different nvlist stream sections, using a common format would allow > other tools to more easily parse and validate the structure inside these > sections. Isn't that a good thing? Is there a reason we're trying to > reinvent the wheel here? > Does JSON support storing binary data? I'm under the impression that it does not. --00000000000053d1c006007652af Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><br></div></div><br><div class=3D"gm= ail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 9:= 40=E2=80=AFAM Matthew Grooms <<a href=3D"mailto:mgrooms@shrew.net">mgroo= ms@shrew.net</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" styl= e=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);paddin= g-left:1ex"><br> I see a need to define a format for bhyve so it's possible to mix <br> different sections and encodings inside a unified stream. But all the <br> data in your nvlist example above can be easily be represented as text. <br= > We already have JSON, YAML, XML, etc ... By adopting an preexisting <br> format, we could retain the snapshot structure instead of lifting it up <br= > into the stream format. Even if we decide to break the structure up into <b= r> different nvlist stream sections, using a common format would allow <br> other tools to more easily parse and validate the structure inside these <b= r> sections. Isn't that a good thing? Is there a reason we're trying t= o <br> reinvent the wheel here?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Does JSON supp= ort storing binary data? I'm under the impression that it does not.<br>= </div></div></div> --00000000000053d1c006007652af--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF3%2Bn_cc5ZpGsKCff%2Bu-rSjnJn%2BN1jdu9KW0Y5b6n_TieMsfng>