Re: [PATCH, RFC] virtio_blk: add cache flush command

[Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>]

Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 07:49:37PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>   
>> Maybe we should add a fourth cache= mode then.  But 
>> cache=writeback+fsync doesn't correspond to any real world drive; in the 
>> real world you're limited to power failures and a few megabytes of cache 
>> (typically less), cache=writeback+fsync can lose hundreds of megabytes 
>> due to power loss or software failure.
>>     
>
> cache=writeback+fsync is exactly the same model as a normal writeback
> cache disk drive.  (Well, almost as we currently don't use tag ordering
> but drain flushes as a Linux implementation detail, but the disks also
> support TCQ-based ordering).
>
> The cache size on disks is constantly growing, and if you lose cache
> it doesn't really matter how much you lose but what you lose.
>   

Software errors won't cause data loss on a real disk (firmware bugs 
will, but the firmware is less likely to crash than the host OS).

>> Oh, and cache=writeback+fsync doesn't work on qcow2, unless we add fsync 
>> after metadata updates.
>>     
>
> If you care about data integrity in case of crashes qcow2 doesn't work
> at all.
>   

Do you known of any known corruptors in qcow2 with cache=writethrough?

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function