Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-stable] [PATCH v7 0/8] block: Mirror discarded sectors

[Alexandre DERUMIER <aderumier@odiso.com>]

>>With nfs as source storage, it's really slow currently (lseek slow + a lot of nfs ops).

it's blocked around 30min for 300GB, with a raw file on a netapp san array through nfs.


----- Mail original -----
De: "aderumier" <aderumier@odiso.com>
À: "Fam Zheng" <famz@redhat.com>
Cc: "Kevin Wolf" <kwolf@redhat.com>, qemu-block@nongnu.org, "Jeff Cody" <jcody@redhat.com>, "qemu-devel" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, "qemu-stable" <qemu-stable@nongnu.org>, "stefanha" <stefanha@redhat.com>, "pbonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>, jsnow@redhat.com, wangxiaolong@ucloud.cn
Envoyé: Vendredi 26 Juin 2015 15:36:10
Objet: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-stable] [PATCH v7 0/8] block: Mirror discarded sectors

Hi, 

>>There is no problem, the observasion by Andrey was just that qmp command takes 
>>a few minutes before returning, because he didn't apply 
>> 
>>https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-05/msg02511.html 

Is this patch already apply on the block tree ? 

With nfs as source storage, it's really slow currently (lseek slow + a lot of nfs ops). 



----- Mail original ----- 
De: "Fam Zheng" <famz@redhat.com> 
À: "pbonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com> 
Cc: "Kevin Wolf" <kwolf@redhat.com>, qemu-block@nongnu.org, "Jeff Cody" <jcody@redhat.com>, "qemu-devel" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, "qemu-stable" <qemu-stable@nongnu.org>, "stefanha" <stefanha@redhat.com>, jsnow@redhat.com, wangxiaolong@ucloud.cn 
Envoyé: Jeudi 25 Juin 2015 12:45:38 
Objet: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-stable] [PATCH v7 0/8] block: Mirror discarded sectors 

On Thu, 06/25 09:02, Fam Zheng wrote: 
> On Wed, 06/24 19:01, Paolo Bonzini wrote: 
> > 
> > 
> > On 24/06/2015 11:08, Fam Zheng wrote: 
> > >> Stefan, 
> > >> 
> > >> The only controversial patches are the qmp/drive-mirror ones (1-3), while 
> > >> patches 4-8 are still useful on their own: they fix the mentioned crash and 
> > >> improve iotests. 
> > >> 
> > >> Shall we merge the second half (of course none of them depend on 1-3) now that 
> > >> softfreeze is approaching? 
> > > 
> > > Stefan, would you consider applying patches 4-8? 
> > 
> > Actually why not apply all of them? Even if blockdev-mirror is a 
> > superior interface in the long run, the current behavior of drive-mirror 
> > can cause images to balloon up to the full size, which is bad. 
> > Extending drive-mirror is okay IMHO for 2.4. 
> > 
> 
> Before we do that, Andrey Korolyov has reported a hang issue with unmap=true, 
> I'll take a look at it today. 

There is no problem, the observasion by Andrey was just that qmp command takes 
a few minutes before returning, because he didn't apply 

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-05/msg02511.html 

Fam