[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xen-users] Performance difference between a "partition image file" and a compressed file system


  • To: Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • From: Kevin McKeon <kevin.w.mckeon@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 12:49:19 -0400
  • Cc:
  • Delivery-date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 09:50:00 -0700
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=NAx0yz4FgbW3/XLrHPlHgWp7QoYwpPJSy7AnRqK32VTfFWGzM0M2OOFYUXz3xjga0g EnyGR581A/9gku7zNW9jMmZ7AarYKQkJ8yWQvs/VuLaxtnWwHyvZDdhItAbBWMUzrr8N Eh4HkFr/qPJyWgOaAj/4c/z1Sxe5wpb8i6W8I=
  • List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>

Does anyone know how significant the performance hit is when using a partition image file for the file system of a domU instance as opposed to using a file system on a separate disk?
 
For example:
 
disk =['tap:aio:/xen/images/mydomU_partition.img,xvda1,w']
vs
disk =['phy:hda1,xvda1,w']
 
I realize the second config would be faster, but will the first one work pretty well? Does anyone know of any performance papers written on this subject?
 
Cheers,
Kevin
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users

 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.