On 16/03/2015 07:19, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 03/13/2015 05:05 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Fri, 03/13 17:01, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 03/11/2015 02:49 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Wed, 03/11 14:44, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 03/03/2015 03:59 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Tue, 03/03 15:53, Wen Congyang wrote:
I
On 03/13/2015 05:05 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Fri, 03/13 17:01, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 03/11/2015 02:49 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Wed, 03/11 14:44, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 03/03/2015 03:59 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Tue, 03/03 15:53, Wen Congyang wrote:
I test qcow2_make_empty()'s performance. The
On 03/11/2015 02:49 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Wed, 03/11 14:44, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 03/03/2015 03:59 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Tue, 03/03 15:53, Wen Congyang wrote:
I test qcow2_make_empty()'s performance. The result shows that it may
take about 100ms(normal sata disk). It is not acceptable
On Fri, 03/13 17:01, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 03/11/2015 02:49 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Wed, 03/11 14:44, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 03/03/2015 03:59 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Tue, 03/03 15:53, Wen Congyang wrote:
I test qcow2_make_empty()'s performance. The result shows that it may
take about
On Wed, 03/11 14:44, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 03/03/2015 03:59 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Tue, 03/03 15:53, Wen Congyang wrote:
I test qcow2_make_empty()'s performance. The result shows that it may
take about 100ms(normal sata disk). It is not acceptable for COLO. So
I think disk buff is
On 03/03/2015 03:59 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Tue, 03/03 15:53, Wen Congyang wrote:
I test qcow2_make_empty()'s performance. The result shows that it may
take about 100ms(normal sata disk). It is not acceptable for COLO. So
I think disk buff is necessary(just use it to replace qcow2).
Why not
On Wed, 03/11 15:01, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 03/11/2015 02:49 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Wed, 03/11 14:44, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 03/03/2015 03:59 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Tue, 03/03 15:53, Wen Congyang wrote:
I test qcow2_make_empty()'s performance. The result shows that it may
take about
On 03/11/2015 02:49 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Wed, 03/11 14:44, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 03/03/2015 03:59 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Tue, 03/03 15:53, Wen Congyang wrote:
I test qcow2_make_empty()'s performance. The result shows that it may
take about 100ms(normal sata disk). It is not acceptable
On 03/11/2015 03:04 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Wed, 03/11 15:01, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 03/11/2015 02:49 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Wed, 03/11 14:44, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 03/03/2015 03:59 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Tue, 03/03 15:53, Wen Congyang wrote:
I test qcow2_make_empty()'s performance. The
* Wen Congyang (we...@cn.fujitsu.com) wrote:
On 03/05/2015 12:35 AM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
* Wen Congyang (we...@cn.fujitsu.com) wrote:
Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Yang Hongyang
* Wen Congyang (we...@cn.fujitsu.com) wrote:
Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Yang Hongyang yan...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: zhanghailiang zhang.zhanghaili...@huawei.com
Signed-off-by: Gonglei
On 03/05/2015 12:35 AM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
* Wen Congyang (we...@cn.fujitsu.com) wrote:
Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Yang Hongyang yan...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: zhanghailiang
On Tue, 03/03 15:53, Wen Congyang wrote:
I test qcow2_make_empty()'s performance. The result shows that it may
take about 100ms(normal sata disk). It is not acceptable for COLO. So
I think disk buff is necessary(just use it to replace qcow2).
Why not tmpfs or ramdisk?
Fam
On 03/03/2015 03:59 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Tue, 03/03 15:53, Wen Congyang wrote:
I test qcow2_make_empty()'s performance. The result shows that it may
take about 100ms(normal sata disk). It is not acceptable for COLO. So
I think disk buff is necessary(just use it to replace qcow2).
Why not
On 02/12/2015 06:26 PM, f...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 18:11, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 05:44 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 17:33, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 04:44 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 15:40, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 03:21 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On 02/26/2015 04:44 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Thu, 02/26 14:38, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/25/2015 10:46 AM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Tue, 02/24 15:50, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 04:44 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 15:40, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 03:21 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
Hi
On Fri, 02/27 10:27, Wen Congyang wrote:
1. nbd-target0 is writable here, without the drive-backup, hidden0 could be
corrupted by writings to it. So there need to be a new convention and
invariance to follow.
Hmm, I understand while the hidden-disk should be opened automatically now.
If
On Wed, 02/25 17:10, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 04:44 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 15:40, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 03:21 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
Hi Congyang,
On Thu, 02/12 11:07, Wen Congyang wrote:
+== Workflow ==
+The following is the image of block replication
On 02/25/2015 04:58 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Wed, 02/25 16:36, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/25/2015 10:46 AM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Tue, 02/24 15:50, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 04:44 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 15:40, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 03:21 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
Hi
On 02/12/2015 04:44 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 15:40, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 03:21 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
Hi Congyang,
On Thu, 02/12 11:07, Wen Congyang wrote:
+== Workflow ==
+The following is the image of block replication workflow:
+
++--+
On Wed, 02/25 16:11, Wen Congyang wrote:
{virtio-blk dev 'foo'}
|
|
|
[base] - [mid] - (foo)
foo's backing is mid, and mid's backing is base?
Yes.
Fam
On 02/25/2015 10:46 AM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Tue, 02/24 15:50, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 04:44 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 15:40, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 03:21 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
Hi Congyang,
On Thu, 02/12 11:07, Wen Congyang wrote:
+== Workflow ==
+The following
On 02/12/2015 04:44 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 15:40, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 03:21 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
Hi Congyang,
On Thu, 02/12 11:07, Wen Congyang wrote:
+== Workflow ==
+The following is the image of block replication workflow:
+
++--+
On Wed, 02/25 16:36, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/25/2015 10:46 AM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Tue, 02/24 15:50, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 04:44 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 15:40, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 03:21 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
Hi Congyang,
On Thu, 02/12 11:07, Wen
On Tue, 02/24 15:50, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 04:44 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 15:40, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 03:21 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
Hi Congyang,
On Thu, 02/12 11:07, Wen Congyang wrote:
+== Workflow ==
+The following is the image of block replication
On 02/12/2015 04:44 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 15:40, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 03:21 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
Hi Congyang,
On Thu, 02/12 11:07, Wen Congyang wrote:
+== Workflow ==
+The following is the image of block replication workflow:
+
++--+
On 02/13/2015 02:01 AM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Fri, 02/13 13:09, Wen Congyang wrote:
What is image fleecing?
It's the name of the feature which enables the built-in NBD server to exporting
a thin point-in-time snapshot created via drive-backup sync=none.
It's for host side data scanning tool
On Thu, 02/12 17:33, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 04:44 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 15:40, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 03:21 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
Hi Congyang,
On Thu, 02/12 11:07, Wen Congyang wrote:
+== Workflow ==
+The following is the image of block replication
On Thu, 02/12 18:11, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 05:44 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 17:33, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 04:44 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 15:40, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 03:21 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
Hi Congyang,
On Thu, 02/12 11:07, Wen
On 02/12/2015 05:44 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 17:33, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 04:44 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 15:40, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 03:21 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
Hi Congyang,
On Thu, 02/12 11:07, Wen Congyang wrote:
+== Workflow ==
+The following
On 02/12/2015 04:44 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 15:40, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 03:21 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
Hi Congyang,
On Thu, 02/12 11:07, Wen Congyang wrote:
+== Workflow ==
+The following is the image of block replication workflow:
+
++--+
On Thu, 02/12 17:36, Hongyang Yang wrote:
Hi Fam,
在 02/12/2015 04:44 PM, Fam Zheng 写道:
On Thu, 02/12 15:40, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 03:21 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
Hi Congyang,
On Thu, 02/12 11:07, Wen Congyang wrote:
+== Workflow ==
+The following is the image of block
Hi Fam,
在 02/12/2015 04:44 PM, Fam Zheng 写道:
On Thu, 02/12 15:40, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 03:21 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
Hi Congyang,
On Thu, 02/12 11:07, Wen Congyang wrote:
+== Workflow ==
+The following is the image of block replication workflow:
+
++--+
On 02/12/2015 06:26 PM, f...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 18:11, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 05:44 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 17:33, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 04:44 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Thu, 02/12 15:40, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 03:21 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Fri, 02/13 13:09, Wen Congyang wrote:
What is image fleecing?
It's the name of the feature which enables the built-in NBD server to exporting
a thin point-in-time snapshot created via drive-backup sync=none.
It's for host side data scanning tool to access a disk snapshot of running VM.
The
On Thu, 02/12 15:40, Wen Congyang wrote:
On 02/12/2015 03:21 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
Hi Congyang,
On Thu, 02/12 11:07, Wen Congyang wrote:
+== Workflow ==
+The following is the image of block replication workflow:
+
++--+
Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Yang Hongyang yan...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: zhanghailiang zhang.zhanghaili...@huawei.com
Signed-off-by: Gonglei arei.gong...@huawei.com
---
docs/block-replication.txt | 129
Hi Congyang,
On Thu, 02/12 11:07, Wen Congyang wrote:
+== Workflow ==
+The following is the image of block replication workflow:
+
++--+++
+|Primary Write Requests||Secondary Write Requests|
+
On 02/12/2015 03:21 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
Hi Congyang,
On Thu, 02/12 11:07, Wen Congyang wrote:
+== Workflow ==
+The following is the image of block replication workflow:
+
++--+++
+|Primary Write Requests|
39 matches
Mail list logo
