On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 1:44 AM, Anthony Liguori <anthony@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> That's probably why it's fast, it doesn't preserve data integrity :(
>>
>> Actually, I misread the code. It does unstable writes but it does do
>> fsync() on FLUSH.
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 8:41 AM, Pekka Enberg <penberg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Yes. That's fine, right? Or did we misread how virtio block devices
> are supposed to work?
And btw, we use sync_file_range() to make sure the metadata part of a
QCOW2 image is never corrupted. The rational here is that if the guest
doesn't do VIRTIO_BLK_T_FLUSH, you can corrupt your _guest filesystem_
but the _image_ will still work just fine and you can do fsck on it.
Also, Prasad ran xfstests and did over-night stress tests to iron out
corruption issues. Now we obviously can't promise that we'll never eat
your data but I can assure you that we've done as much as we've been
able to with the resources we have at the moment.
Pekka
--
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
