From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Valtteri Kiviniemi Subject: Re: Which disk backend to use in domU? Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 20:42:28 +0300 Message-ID: <4C127584.6070801@dataproof.fi> References: <1382341628.4833695.1276117331660.JavaMail.root@vms170009.mailsrvcs.net> <1742609046.4840453.1276126053830.JavaMail.root@vms170009.mailsrvcs.net> <4C1025C0.2070808@goop.org> <28857720.post@talk.nabble.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <28857720.post@talk.nabble.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Hi, I am also using phy: with LVM-partitions, and I also would like to know if there is a better or more preferred way. - Valtteri Kiviniemi Neobiker kirjoitti: > Hello Jeremy, > > > Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: >> Using phy: in your config file? That really isn't recommended because it >> has poor integrity; the writes are buffered in dom0 so writes can be >> reordered or lost on crash, and the guest filesystem can't maintain any >> of its own integrity guarantees. >> >> tap:aio: is more resilient, since the writes go directly to the device >> without buffering. > > Do you mean that using tap:aio with a disk.image is prefered against using > phy: with LVM-device? > > Best Regards > Jens Friedrich aka Neobiker (www.neobiker.de)