On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 10:13:20AM +0200, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: > Hello list, > > while testing bcache i noticed that while writing a big 48GB file the > sequential cutoff works fine i see only I/O on the disk but not on the > cache. I thought i would afterwards see a bypassed value of around 48GB > but it is only 1.2GB. > > Is this expected? Is bcache in kernel 3.10 stable for production usage? That sounds like a bug, but bcache in 3.10 certainly should be stable for production usage. There can be some weirdness due to the way the stats work, there's a ~13 second update interval (and also the intermediate counters are 32 bit ints so if you manage to wrap that in 13 seconds you'll lose counts, but it's counting sectors so I doubt that happened here). Does that sound like it might explain what you were seeing, or do you think there's something else going on? -- 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
