Re: bcache compared to more RAM

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 7:30 PM, C Sights <csights@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi all,
>    Has anyone tried creating a bcache device in RAM and benchmarking
> performance of that versus just allowing that RAM to be used as file system
> buffers?

I doubt it; bcache is designed to use non-volatile flash memory rather
than ram.

If the filesystem is readonly, I imagine that using RAM for bcache
would lead to worse performance as it would just add overhead. If the
filesystem is read-write then it might lead to better performance but
would also lead to the file-system being trashed on if unexpected
power loss occurs.

Under what circumstance would you intend to actually use ram backed bcache?

-- 
John C. McCabe-Dansted
--
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


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux