On 6/16/11, Gordon Messmer <yinyang at eburg.com> wrote: > I read somewhere recently that people were complaining abut LVM overhead > and poor performance, but I've never seen any evidence of it. Was there > something that made you think that LVM had significant overhead? Looking at some very sparse notes I made on the decision, I think what tipped the choice was that both qcow2 and lvm added overheads, but lvm was on the whole system i.e. the host has additional processing on every i/o whereas qcow2 overheads was only for guest i/o. More critically my note was the thought as well that it would be easier to move a qcow2 file to another machine/disk if necessary than to move a partition.