On 4/10/06, Ming Zhang <mingz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-04-10 at 14:46 -0500, Eric Van Hensbergen wrote:
> > On 4/10/06, Ed Wilts <ewilts@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > The obvious question is why? What would this provide that the kernel
> > > and file systems don't already provide?
> > >
> >
> > Well, kernel provides in-memory page cache, not local disk page cache.
> > There is some ongoing remote file system local disk cache work being
> > done, but it applies primarily to AFS and NFS - not block-based
> > transports such as iSCSI and AOE. The various cluster file systems
> > may provide something more akin to this, but again, this doesn't
> > really cover SAN technologies -- not in any sort of a generic way.
> > Let me know if I'm missing something.
>
> still, what is the main benefit of this cache? what u mean "local disk
> page cache"? use "local disk" as page cache or page cache for "local
> disk" or something else?
>
Okay, I suppose I wasn't exactly clear. What I want is something that
will let me use a local disk (or local disks) as a cache for a storage
area network volume (or volumes). There are a variety of scenarios -
my primary interest is in using it for large clusters with shared
read-only volumes or with exclusive-access read/write volumes. So,
local disk page cache is probably not the right terminology -- it is
simply a local block cache for a remote block device.
-eric
--
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
