-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Blake [mailto:eblake@redhat.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 12:25 AM
To: Martin Kletzander; Chen, Hanxiao/陈 晗霄
Cc: libvir-list(a)redhat.com
Subject: Re: [libvirt] [PATCH RFC] storage: perform btrfs clone if possible
On 11/24/2014 12:09 AM, Martin Kletzander wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 02:11:47PM +0800, Chen Hanxiao wrote:
>> We already had nocow flags in virStorageSource.
>> But when creating RAW file, we don't take advantage
>> of clone of btrfs.
>> This file introduce btrfs_clone_file function,
>> and try to use it when !nocow.
>>
>
> I'm not sure we want to do this, but I have nothing against that
> either. So I'll just review the code without any other comments.
>
>
> As I said, I'm not commenting on whether we want this in or not, so
> for that you should wait for someone's response. I bet there's a
> (good) reason behind libvirt not using some lvm/zfs/btrfs features,
> but I am too lazy to search for it since it'd be inaccurate anyway.
I think it makes sense to expose this functionality; although I suspect
it is better if we do so by having the user pass an explicit new flag
value to existing API instead of doing it automatically.
Thanks for your clarification.
But we've already had nocow in virStorageSource and <nocow> tags.
So I think if we do not specify <nocow> tags in XML,
we should try it according to 'nocow' in codes.
Or do we need a new flags such as --reflink
for tools like virt-clone?
Thanks,
- Chen