On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 7:45 AM, Pekka Enberg <penberg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 9:41 AM, Markus Armbruster <armbru@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> What hasn't been discussed much is the other half of Kevin's remark: why >> QCOW1? > > QCOW1 was simpler to implement as the first non-raw image format. Why even use a non-raw image format? The current implementation only does sparse files, but POSIX sparse raw files gives you the same feature. Besides, why not use btrfs or device-mapper instead of doing image formats, which ultimately duplicate file system and volume management code in userspace? Stefan -- 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
