On 28.05.19 08:39, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> 27.05.2019 18:13, Max Reitz wrote:
>> On 08.04.19 18:26, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
>>> drv_co_block_status digs bs->file for additional, more accurate search
>>> for hole inside region, reported as DATA by bs since 5daa74a6ebc.
>>>
27.05.2019 18:13, Max Reitz wrote:
> On 08.04.19 18:26, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
>> drv_co_block_status digs bs->file for additional, more accurate search
>> for hole inside region, reported as DATA by bs since 5daa74a6ebc.
>>
>> This accuracy is not free: assume we have qcow2 disk. Actu
On 08.04.19 18:26, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> drv_co_block_status digs bs->file for additional, more accurate search
> for hole inside region, reported as DATA by bs since 5daa74a6ebc.
>
> This accuracy is not free: assume we have qcow2 disk. Actually, qcow2
> knows, where are holes and
Am 08.04.2019 um 18:26 hat Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy geschrieben:
> drv_co_block_status digs bs->file for additional, more accurate search
> for hole inside region, reported as DATA by bs since 5daa74a6ebc.
>
> This accuracy is not free: assume we have qcow2 disk. Actually, qcow2
> knows, where
drv_co_block_status digs bs->file for additional, more accurate search
for hole inside region, reported as DATA by bs since 5daa74a6ebc.
This accuracy is not free: assume we have qcow2 disk. Actually, qcow2
knows, where are holes and where is data. But every block_status
request calls lseek additi
