Re: LVM performance vs direct dm-thin

On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 09:27:56PM +0100, Gionatan Danti wrote:
> Il 2022-01-30 18:43 Zdenek Kabelac ha scritto:
> > Chain filesystem->block_layer->filesystem->block_layer is something
> > you most likely do not want to use for any well performing solution...
> > But it's ok for testing...
> 
> I second that.
> 
> Demi Marie - just a question: are you sure do you really needs a block
> device? I don't know QubeOS, but both KVM and Xen can use files as virtual
> disks. This would enable you to ignore loopback mounts.

On Xen, the paravirtualised block backend driver (blkback) requires a
block device, so file-based virtual disks are implemented with a loop
device managed by the toolstack.  Suggestions for improving this
less-than-satisfactory situation are welcome.
-- 
Sincerely,
Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers)
Invisible Things Lab

_______________________________________________
linux-lvm mailing list
[email protected]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=ngVF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----