On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 02:01:53PM +0300, Timofey Titovets wrote: > > On 12/09/17 13:32, Adam Borowski wrote: > >> Just use raw -- btrfs already has every feature that qcow2 has, and > >> does it better. This doesn't mean btrfs is the best choice for hosting > >> VM files, just that raw-over-btrfs is strictly better than > >> qcow2-over-btrfs. > > > > Thanks for advice, I wasn't sure I won't lose features, and was too lazy to > > investigate/ask. Now it looks simple. > > The main problem with Raw over Btrfs is that (IIRC) no one support > btrfs features. > > - Patches for libvirt not merged and obsolete > - Patches for Proxmox also not merged > - Other VM hypervisor like Virtualbox, VMware just ignore btrfs features. > > So with raw you will have a problems like: no snapshot support
Why would you need support in the hypervisor if cp --reflink=always is enough? Likewise, I wouldn't expect hypervisors to implement support for every dedup tool -- it'd be a layering violation[1]. It's not emacs or systemd, you really can use an external tool instead of adding a lawnmower to the kitchen sink. Meow! [1] Yeah, talking about layering violations in btrfs context is a bit weird, but it's better to at least try. -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ I've read an article about how lively happy music boosts ⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ productivity. You can read it, too, you just need the ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ right music while doing so. I recommend Skepticism ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ (funeral doom metal). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
