From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:54840) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TsUta-0000Bt-DB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2013 03:50:56 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TsUtZ-00013X-Gu for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2013 03:50:54 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:21003) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TsUtZ-000133-8V for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2013 03:50:53 -0500 From: Vadim Rozenfeld Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 10:50:40 +0200 References: <24F53AF8-51CF-4A00-9827-86BF38680BDA@dlhnet.de> In-Reply-To: <24F53AF8-51CF-4A00-9827-86BF38680BDA@dlhnet.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201301081050.40631.vrozenfe@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Windows and I/O size List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Lieven Cc: "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , ronnie sahlberg On Tuesday, January 08, 2013 10:16:48 AM Peter Lieven wrote: > Hi all, > > I came across the fact that Windows seems to requests greater 64KB into > pieces leading to a lot of IOPs on the storage side. > > Can anyone imagine of a way to merge them before sending them to e.g. an > iSCSI Storage? 64KB I/O Size is not optimal when e.g. large sequential > operations with an iSCSI target. > > Thank you, > Peter Hi Peter. Is it viostor? Which version? The most recent one is able to handle 256K blocks. Best regards, Vadim.