>>> On 4/9/2015 at 02:56 AM, in message <98agvb-l7r.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Kai Krakow <hurikhan77@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > David Mohr <david@xxxxxxxx> schrieb: > > > On 2015-04-06 09:44, arnaud gaboury wrote: > >> Here is my overall plan: > >> > >> root filesystem & OS on a SSD > >> DB and other stuff on HD. > >> Use ssd as caching device and HD as backing. > >> > >> Shall I partition the SSD with : one partition for OS and one empty > >> for bcache? Or install the OS on the whole SSD and use the whole SSD > >> as caching device? > >> > >> Thank you for hint. > > > > So this is just depending on your preference, how big the SSD is, and > > how much space you expect your OS to take up. > > > > Personally I split my SSD into two partitions: one for the root FS, and > > the other as a caching device for /home. > > The other preference is valid, too: I chose to put bcache only on the SSD to > > get maximum benefit from its capacity, rootfs and home dynamically share the > Hi David, I am curious about how rootfs and home share the SSD dynamically. Are they on the same partition? Sorry for stupid questions since I just touched bcache recently. Regards, Lidong > cache then depending on demands. So rootfs is a bit slower as natively on > SSD but home can gain much more because unsed parts of the rootfs are > available for caching. > > The split-setup preference in turn gives you a fallback boot option in case > bcache chokes: You still have a working rootfs to do repairs or restore > backups. In my setup I encounter that problem with a working USB3-HD mirror > of my system I can boot and restore from which is synced and snapshotted > every night (so it also protects against accidental file deletion synced > undetected into the backup). Most valuable data is stored remotely (photos, > source code, documents, configuration, etc). -- 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
