On 02/23/2011 07:43 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/22/2011 10:56 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
*sigh*
It starts to get annoying, but if you really insist, I can repeat it
once more: These features that you don't need (this is the correct
description for what you call "misfeatures") _are_ implemented in a way
that they don't impact the "normal" case. And they are it today.
Plus, encryption and snapshots can be implemented in a way that
doesn't impact performance more than is reasonable.
We're still missing the existence proof of this, but even assuming it
existed, what about snapshots? Are we okay having a feature in a
prominent format that isn't going to meet user's expectations?
Is there any hope that an image with 1000, 1000, or 10000 snapshots is
going to have even reasonable performance in qcow2?
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
Compression perhaps not, but if you choose compression, then
performance is not your top consideration. That's the case with
filesystems that support compression as well.
