Re: [PATCH] virtio-blk: set QUEUE_ORDERED_DRAIN by default

[Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>]

On 08/28/2009 04:15 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 08:34:19 pm Avi Kivity wrote:
>    
>> There are two possible semantics to cache=writeback:
>>
>> - simulate a drive with a huge write cache; use fsync() to implement
>> barriers
>> - tell the host that we aren't interested in data integrity, lie to the
>> guest to get best performance
>>      
> Why lie to the guest?  Just say we're not ordered, and don't support barriers.
> Gets even *better* performance since it won't drain the queues.
>    

In that case, honesty is preferable.  It means testing with 
cache=writeback exercises different guest code paths, but that's acceptable.

> Maybe you're thinking of full virtualization where we guest ignorance is
> bliss.  But lying always gets us in trouble later on when other cases come
> up.
>
>    
>> The second semantic is not useful for production, but is very useful for
>> testing out things where you aren't worries about host crashes and
>> you're usually rebooting the guest very often (you can't rely on guest
>> caches, so you want the host to cache).
>>      
> This is not the ideal world; people will do things for performance "in
> production".
>
>    

We found that cache=none is faster than cache=writeback when you're 
really interested in performance (no qcow2).

-- 
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.