Re: qcow2 overlay performance

[Alberto Garcia]

On Thu 27 Aug 2020 06:29:15 PM CEST, Yoonho Park wrote:
> Below is the data with the cache disabled ("virsh attach-disk ... --cache
> none"). I added the previous data for reference. Overall, random read
> performance was not affected significantly. This makes sense because a
> cache is probably not going to help random read performance much. BTW how
> big the cache is by default? Random write performance for 4K blocks seems
> more "sane" now. Random write performance for 64K blocks is interesting
> because base image (0 overlay) performance is 2X slower than 1-5 overlays.
> We believe this is because the random writes to an overlay actually turn
> into sequential writes (appends to the overlay). Does this make sense?
>
>
> NO CACHE
>
>       4K blocks                    64K blocks
>
> olays rd bw rd iops wr bw  wr iops rd bw rd iops wr bw  wr iops
>
> 0     4478  1119    4684   1171    57001 890     42050  657
>
> 1     4490  1122    2503   625     56656 885     93483  1460

I haven't been able to reproduce this (I tried the scenarios with 0 and
1 overlays), did you figure out anything new or what's the situation?

Berto