Troels Arvin wrote:
Hello,
I'm conducting some performancetests with KVM-virtualized CentOSes. One
thing I noticed is that guest I/O performance seems to be significantly
better for virtio-based block devices ("drive"s) if the cache=none
argument is used. (This was with a rather powerful storage system
backend which is hard to saturate.)
So: Why isn't cache=none be the default for drives?
Is that the right question? Or is the right question "Why is cache=none
faster?"
What did you use for measuring the performance? I have found in the past
that virtio block device was slower than IDE block device emulation.
Gordan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
