| |||||||||||||
A bcache updateA bcache updatePosted May 16, 2012 1:52 UTC (Wed) by koverstreet (subscriber, #4296)In reply to: A bcache update by intgr Parent article: A bcache update
Well, you want the sequential writes to bypass the cache, which is what bcache does.
If you can show me a workload that'd benefit though - I'm not opposed to the idea, it's just a question of priorities.
(Log in to post comments)
A bcache update Posted May 16, 2012 7:35 UTC (Wed) by intgr (subscriber, #39733) [Link]
> Well, you want the sequential writes to bypass the cache, which is what bcache does
Oh, I didn't realize that. That should take care of most of it. There's probably still some benefit to sorting writeback by size, but I'm not sure whether it's worth the complexity.
|
|||||||||||||