From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bastian de Groot Subject: Re: large overhead with blktap2/vhd Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 13:15:21 +0200 Message-ID: <201006241315.21498.degroot@univention.de> References: <201006231726.06620.degroot@univention.de> <201006241041.30901.csamsel@gmxpro.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <201006241041.30901.csamsel@gmxpro.de> Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com Cc: Christian Samsel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Am Donnerstag 24 Juni 2010 10:41:30 schrieben Sie: > Am Mittwoch, 23. Juni 2010, 17:26:05 schrieb Bastian de Groot: > > Hi everybody, > > > > I am searching for a copy-on-write solution for Xen and tested blktap2 > > with the vhd backend. > > > > My Test: > > > > I've created a master-image with "dd" and installed WindowsXP on the > > image. Then I used vhd-util to create a copy-on-write-image for the > > master-image. > > > > After booting the VM and logging in the, the cow-image had a size of 260 > > MB. That's a little bit weird, because I didn't really changend any data. > > Just one word: swap. > > Christian Good guess! I've tested it with deactivated swap in WindowsXP, but it didn't have any effect. The results were the same. Bastian