[linux-lvm] LVM performance vs direct dm-thin

[Demi Marie Obenour]

On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 09:27:56PM +0100, Gionatan Danti wrote:
> Il 2022-01-30 18:43 Zdenek Kabelac ha scritto:
> > Chain filesystem->block_layer->filesystem->block_layer is something
> > you most likely do not want to use for any well performing solution...
> > But it's ok for testing...
> 
> I second that.
> 
> Demi Marie - just a question: are you sure do you really needs a block
> device? I don't know QubeOS, but both KVM and Xen can use files as virtual
> disks. This would enable you to ignore loopback mounts.

On Xen, the paravirtualised block backend driver (blkback) requires a
block device, so file-based virtual disks are implemented with a loop
device managed by the toolstack.  Suggestions for improving this
less-than-satisfactory situation are welcome.
-- 
Sincerely,
Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers)
Invisible Things Lab
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/linux-lvm/attachments/20220130/bca2ebe6/attachment.sig>