| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-users
Re: [Xen-users] Difference between file and tap:aio
Would file: really have a better performance than phy: ? I am planing to
use a own partition for my Windows HVM Domain, cause in the fact you
going to use a Filesystem in a filesystem, so this need more time than
only "one" filesystem i think.....
Am 09.04.2010 16:24, schrieb Pasi Kärkkäinen:
On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 07:13:22AM -0700, Fantu wrote:
Someone can explain me good difference between file and tap:aio, pros and
cons, and also with all possibility with blktap2? Thanks for any response
file: uses dom0 kernel page cache, and thus might give better performance than
phy: or tap:aio:,
but it's also more insecure because of the caching.
tap:aio: uses direct IO, so it bypasses dom0 kernel caches, and works like phy:
in that sense.
blktap1 provides also other modes than :aio, like: qcow, but those were not
very stable or fast,
so blktap2 was developed. for blktap1 see:
http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/blktap .
blktap2 also has vhd image support including snapshots and cloning.
See here: http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/blktap2 .
-- Pasi
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
|
|
|
| |
|
Home