cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Logan Barfield <lbarfi...@tqhosting.com>
Subject RBD snapshot format
Date Thu, 29 Jan 2015 16:16:58 GMT
I was doing some testing earlier this week on a KVM cluster, and
noticed that when using S3 for secondary storage snapshots on RBD
primary storage take a lot longer than they do with NFS primary
storage.

I think this is due to the NFS snapshots being output/uploaded in
QCOW2 format, while RBD snapshots are output in RAW format.  It
appears that even when using sparse RAW files they are uploaded to S3
with the 'allocated' size instead of the sparse size.

My question is: Is there a good reason for RBD snapshots to be output
as RAW instead of QCOW2?  It appears that QCOW2 templates are
automatically converted when deploying them as RBD, so that shouldn't
be a problem.  The only downside I can think of would be having to
convert the RAW RBD data to QCOW2 as an extra step when creating
snapshots, but even that seems like it would take less time than
uploading the RAW images to S3.

Thoughts?


Thank You,

Logan Barfield
Tranquil Hosting

Mime
View raw message