From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Philipp Hahn Subject: Re: pvops upstream status - VHD Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 07:21:40 +0200 Message-ID: <53A90AE4.4060708@univention.de> References: <53A00FE5.3050709@suse.com> <53A01EAF.1060102@m2r.biz> <53A043D9.4050304@suse.com> <53A050A9.9010502@m2r.biz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta4.messagelabs.com ([85.158.143.247]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1WzKBi-0006lw-6V for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 06:26:38 +0000 In-Reply-To: <53A050A9.9010502@m2r.biz> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Fabio Fantoni , Juergen Gross , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Hello, On 17.06.2014 16:28, Fabio Fantoni wrote: > My test was only with raw image, for what I read time ago probably the > only problem should be with vhd format they said needed improvements on > qemu but they might have done in the meantime (if I remember good I read > it 2 year ago). VHD in QEMU had very little changes, differencing images are still not supported (I have a WIP patch which supports reading, but write seems to be broken). What's also missing it support for the journaling extension, which vhd-utils supports. VHDX support seems to be a lot better in QEMU (and non-existent in chd-utils), which AFAIK has removed some limitations of VHD (image size, journaling support), so my personal opinion would classify VHD as legacy, for which read support is good to have, but write support is less important. Philipp