-
Bug
-
Resolution: Unresolved
-
Normal
-
rhel-10.2
-
None
-
None
-
None
-
rhel-virt-windows
-
None
-
False
-
False
-
-
None
-
None
-
None
-
None
-
Unspecified
-
Unspecified
-
Unspecified
-
None
What were you trying to do that didn't work?
Viostor/vioscsi is ~8x Slower than Rhel's Vioblk/vioscsi
Please provide the package NVR for which the bug is seen:
qemu-kvm-10.1.0-12.el10
kernel-6.12.0-195.el10.x86_64
How reproducible is this bug?:
100%
Actual results
The rhel's

The windows's

The detailed steps are in https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fvxQDYcS4eGrfKtprq1SdAs3pVRU9kVFR2W73ZapAD8/edit?usp=sharing
Note that:
- Windows' own vioblk performs worse than vioscsi, which is unexpected
- Windows' vioblk/vioscsi is ~8x slower than rhel's, but window's SATA is only ~1.7x slower than rhel's SATA