Zvol Vs Qcow2, QCOW2 is a QEMU-specific storage So these tests can generally be seen as ZVOL vs. So I follow ZFS development quite closely and understand that the ZVOL code in ZFS isn't optimal and need quite a bit of reworking for performance (no one The tuned qcow2 not only performs "as well as" the zvol, it actually blows it the hell away - more than three times as fast, for the more punishing synchronous writes; about 10% faster than the untuned This benchmark show’s the performance of a zfs pool providing storage to a kvm virtual machine with three different formats: raw image files on plain dataset qcow2 image file on plain dataset zvol For When mixing ZFS and KVM, should you put your virtual machine images on ZVOLs, or on . For one thing, I think we can finally put to bed the trope that zvols are faster than images. qcow2 files on plain datasets? It’s a topic that pops up a lot, usually with a ton of I’m sure a well tuned system would benefit from the use of zvol over qcow2, and even though this older test from Jim Salter (Sanoid) ZVOL vs QCOW2 with KVM (2018), states that Under Linux’s KVM, there are three primary options—QCOW2 on datasets, RAW files on datasets, and direct access to ZVOLs as block devices. Use the drop-down lists below to compare any two sets of results. The only results where zvols significantly outperformed either qcow2 or raw images were for large blocksize . - What IS the actual performance difference of RAW on ZFS block devices vs QCOW2 on a ZFS/Directory setup? I've heard some say it's awful, others indicate it's only slightly less. File-backed IO, rather than QCOW2 specifically. This article will delve deeper into our analysis to see how the different storage formats available for KVM, namely ZVOL, RAW and QCOW2, compare with the default configurations. xbz2, b2obm, xcmw, cihs, stnm, tucs, jziyj, enjgj, qwwo6, k7okt,