On 01/09/22 19:51, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> 
> Part 1:
> https://listman.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2022-January/msg00055.html
> Part 2:
> https://listman.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2022-January/msg00057.html
> 
> This is part 3 of my performance analysis of virt-v2v over the last
> year.  In this email I cover conversion from VMware to a local disk
> using VDDK.  This is a more realistic test than doing local disk to
> local disk conversions.
> 
> As you can see from the new chart in the attached file [LibreOffice
> Calc format] modular virt-v2v has got a little faster over all, with
> conversion taking slightly longer and copying being slightly faster.
> 
> If you expand the hidden columns (between columns F & M) you will also
> see clearly the new flushing behaviour of nbdcopy, where it always
> flushes the output to disk, versus "qemu-img convert" which used the
> page cache (notice the Sync times in column L).  This can make old
> virt-v2v appear to be much faster, but the appearance is not real.

So this confirms that there is no performance regression in the "VMware
to a local disk using VDDK" conversion case -- this is the result we've
been looking for, right?

Thanks,
Laszlo

_______________________________________________
Libguestfs mailing list
[email protected]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libguestfs

Reply via email to