Re: [Xen-users] Support for file-based COW, present and future

On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Grant McWilliams
<grantmasterflash@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 12:48 AM, Fajar A. Nugraha <fajar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Personally, I gave up trying to use qcow a long time ago, settling
>> instead for storage-based COW functionality using zfs-fuse.
>>

> Have you ran into any pitfalls with zfs-fuse? Are you using it in
> production?

I'd consider it beta-quality. I use zfs-fuse in production, but not
with Xen (where I only use it for dev purposes). If you're considering
using zfs for production then at this point I'd recommend having a
separate server running NexentaStor/Solaris as storage server only.

> I'm waiting for everyone else to beta test Xen4. It's a little
> frustrating that qcow was never really finished because it isn't like the
> code is proprietary or anything, it's right there for the taking...

There seems to be additional factors that made VHD support get higher priority
http://community.citrix.com/display/ocb/2009/02/18/We've+Open+Sourced+Our+Optimized+VHD+Support

-- 
Fajar

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users

<Prev in Thread]

Current Thread

[Next in Thread>

Previous by Date:

Re: [Xen-users] VT-Support error, Net Warrior

Next by Date:

[Xen-users] bonding on domU, dongkyu lee

Previous by Thread:

Re: [Xen-users] Support for file-based COW, present and future, Garrett Robinson

Next by Thread:

[Xen-users] Centos 5.5 DomO and FreeBSD/Ubuntu Support?, Periko Support

Indexes:

[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]