| 1 |
On Thursday, June 23 at 00:35 (-0400), Matthew Finkel said: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Oh, don't get me wrong, that's one reason I use qcow2 myself, but it's |
| 4 |
> either something he would have to deal with when he received it or the |
| 5 |
> conversion would increase the size of the disk image that would be |
| 6 |
> shipped to him. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Yes, of course a raw image file will typically be bigger than a |
| 9 |
compressed qcow, just as an unpacked stage4..tar.bz2 file is going to be |
| 10 |
bigger than the original archive. But in terms transferability, |
| 11 |
compressed qcows are more efficient since they only include *used* |
| 12 |
blocks and they are compressed. I can convert the image into any of a |
| 13 |
number of formats, but the issue then is it will be bigger, and thus |
| 14 |
take me longer to upload it and the OP to download it. |
Archives