From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F7B9634CC for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 08:16:58 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 68B75CEBC for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 08:16:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from sara.proxmox.com (212-186-127-178.static.upcbusiness.at [212.186.127.178]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id BC1B9CEB4 for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 08:16:27 +0100 (CET) Received: by sara.proxmox.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 84F02341351; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 08:16:27 +0100 (CET) From: Moayad Almalat To: pve-devel@pve.proxmox.com Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 08:16:16 +0100 Message-Id: <20210210071616.26122-1-m.almalat@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.20.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 1 AWL -0.125 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY 1 Sending domain does not have any anti-forgery methods KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS 0.399 Relay HELO differs from its IP's reverse DNS NO_DNS_FOR_FROM 0.379 Envelope sender has no MX or A DNS records SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_NONE 0.001 SPF: sender does not publish an SPF Record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [linuxfoundation.org, archive.org] Subject: [pve-devel] [PATCH pve-docs]: update link qemu documentation X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 07:16:58 -0000 Signed-off-by: Moayad Almalat --- qm.adoc | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/qm.adoc b/qm.adoc index 333b2e6..1108908 100644 --- a/qm.adoc +++ b/qm.adoc @@ -203,7 +203,7 @@ either the *raw disk image format* or the *QEMU image format*. format does not support thin provisioning or snapshots by itself, requiring cooperation from the storage layer for these tasks. It may, however, be up to 10% faster than the *QEMU image format*. footnote:[See this benchmark for details - http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/CloudOpen2013_Khoa_Huynh_v3.pdf] + https://web.archive.org/web/20171027194629/https://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/CloudOpen2013_Khoa_Huynh_v3.pdf] * the *VMware image format* only makes sense if you intend to import/export the disk image to other hypervisors. -- 2.20.1