On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 11:20 PM, Liang Guo <bluestonechina@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 7:04 PM, Zhi Yong Wu <zwu.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> I don't use bcache now. To use bcache, I need rebuild the entire kernel. >>> >>> I use flashcache instead, it can be compiled as a kernel model. >> Sorry, I am bcache newbie, please execute me to ask one more question. >> >> Just search flashcahce, it seems to have similar functions as bcache. >> right? If so, what is the difference between flashcache and bcache? If >> compared to flashcache, what are bcache's advantage and weakness >> separately? >> > As far as I know, both flashcache and bcache can use ssd as a cache device, > flashcache can be compiled a kernel module, but bcache can only be patched > in the kernel tree and be compiled with the entire kernel. If you are using a > vender provided kernel, compiling as kernel module needs less work then > compiling the entire kernel. > > Bcache peoples are working hard to merge bcache into upstream kernel, once > it enters to the upstream kernel, it will become a standard feature. and will be > easy to use. > > I have not do performance test. I don't know which one is better for > your situation. Great, thanks a lot. > > BTW: If you want to use ssd as read cache, zfs[1][2] is a option too. > > [1] http://zfs-fuse.net/ > [2] http://zfsonlinux.org/ > > > -- > Liang Guo > http://bluestone.cublog.cn -- Regards, Zhi Yong Wu -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bcache" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
