From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L9JrF-0006A8-UH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 07 Dec 2008 08:39:37 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L9JrE-00068V-9J for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 07 Dec 2008 08:39:37 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=46954 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L9JrE-00068S-25 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 07 Dec 2008 08:39:36 -0500 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:49388) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1L9JrD-0001Eo-Lu for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 07 Dec 2008 08:39:35 -0500 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id mB7DdXQq028088 for ; Sun, 7 Dec 2008 08:39:34 -0500 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id mB7DdX4f016190 for ; Sun, 7 Dec 2008 08:39:33 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain (vpn-12-83.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.12.83]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id mB7DdWlJ000815 for ; Sun, 7 Dec 2008 08:39:32 -0500 Message-ID: <493BD226.1010507@redhat.com> Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2008 15:39:50 +0200 From: Dor Laor MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] SCSI emulation not recognised with Windows Web Server 2008 guest References: <20081206220906.GA34210@saturn.kn-bremen.de> <20081207103337.GA23212@shareable.org> In-Reply-To: <20081207103337.GA23212@shareable.org> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------040905030102070900030605" Reply-To: dlaor@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------040905030102070900030605 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jamie Lokier wrote: > Juergen Lock wrote: > >> (I tested dd bs=64k count=500 /dev/null and >> similar with a raw image, both scsi and virtio were always faster than ide.) >> > > On a related note, I tried using KVM's SCSI with Windows Web Server > 2008, and at install time it didn't recognise the SCSI device, asking > for a driver disk. So I had to use IDE. Anyone had any better luck > with Windows and SCSI? Was this device supported by older versions of > Windows? > > Yes it was. I wonder if there is no win2008 driver? > On virtio, just wondering if anyone's interested in writing Windows > virtio block drivers? > > We'll write one. It will take a while. > Cheers, > -- Jamie > > > --------------040905030102070900030605 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jamie Lokier wrote:

Juergen Lock wrote:

(I tested dd bs=64k count=500 </dev/vda >/dev/null and
similar with a raw image, both scsi and virtio were always faster than ide.)


On a related note, I tried using KVM's SCSI with Windows Web Server
2008, and at install time it didn't recognise the SCSI device, asking
for a driver disk.  So I had to use IDE.  Anyone had any better luck
with Windows and SCSI?  Was this device supported by older versions of
Windows?

Yes it was. I wonder if there is no win2008 driver?

On virtio, just wondering if anyone's interested in writing Windows
virtio block drivers?

We'll write one. It will take a while.

Cheers,
-- Jamie

--------------040905030102070900030605--