From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:34505)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1Sdkj2-0006lg-3r
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 12:10:49 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1Sdkiz-0000ru-NT
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 12:10:47 -0400
Received: from mail-we0-f173.google.com ([74.125.82.173]:56420)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1Sdkiz-0000rp-FI
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 12:10:45 -0400
Received: by werf3 with SMTP id f3so1850274wer.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 09:10:43 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FD4C6FE.8010501@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2012 18:10:38 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAM8qCPK4_WeOVg=C+Lu95PwjTWbxUS3j+PYkqSAB-t0vOTRHZw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FD0B759.8030002@redhat.com>
	<CAJSP0QU_adm=oHYpgu6N_jLEQjpsGmgtF8Q-64aExgvcNTo8ug@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FD1FBF1.10305@redhat.com>
	<CAJSP0QVtvYxCOJX1okgfJH1vKG8nWdmPE5Ew3Dwvjm51-rUCzA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FD20D11.1080603@redhat.com> <4FD22422.1080301@redhat.com>
	<4FD23A73.8080502@redhat.com> <4FD23D0D.6040602@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4FD23D0D.6040602@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] CoW image commit+shrink(= make_empty) support
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>, jcody@redhat.com, Zhi Hui Li <zhihuili@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Taisuke Yamada <tai@rakugaki.org>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Il 08/06/2012 19:57, Kevin Wolf ha scritto:
>> > 
>> > I agree, doing it like mirroring for new writes on the top layer makes
>> > sense, as long as you are willing to violate the (optional) speed
>> > parameter.  I wouldn't think violating the speed parameter in that case
>> > would be an issue, as long as it is a documented affect of performing a
>> > live commit on the active (top) layer.
> The question is what the speed parameter really means for a live commit
> block job (or for an active mirror). I think it would make sense to
> limit only the speed of I/O that doesn't come from the guest but is from
> the background copying.

Not necessarily, you can throttle the copying speed.  If the I/O from
the guest has bursts, you will pick up the work later when the rate
calms down.

Paolo