Re: rbd cp vs. rbd clone + rbd flatten

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

 



On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 10:51 PM Tony Liu <tonyliu0592@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I want
> 1) copy a snapshot to an image,
> 2) no need to copy snapshots,
> 3) no dependency after copy,
> 4) all same image format 2.
> In that case, is rbd cp the same as rbd clone + rbd flatten?
> I ran some tests, seems like it, but want to confirm, in case of missing anything.

Hi Tony,

Yes, at a high level it should be the same.

> Also, seems cp is a bit faster and flatten, is that true?

I can't think of anything that would make "rbd cp" faster.  I would
actually expect it to be slower since "rbd cp" also attempts to sparsify
the destination image (see --sparse-size option), making it more space
efficient.

Thanks,

                Ilya
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Ceph Development]     [Ceph Large]     [Ceph Dev]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [xfs]


  Powered by Linux