Re: EnhanceIO(TM) caching driver features [1/3]

On Saturday 25 May 2013, Jens Axboe wrote: > Please don't top post! Got to use a different email client for that. Note that I am writing this from my personal email address. This email and any future emails I write from this address are my personal views and sTec can't be held responsible for th

Re: EnhanceIO(TM) caching driver features [1/3]

Please don't top post! On Sat, May 25 2013, Amit Kale wrote: > Hi Jens, > > I by mistake dropped the weblink to demartek study while composing my > email. The demartek study is published here: > http://www.demartek.com/Demartek_STEC_S1120_PCIe_Evaluation_2013-02.html. > It's an independent study.

Re: EnhanceIO(TM) caching driver features [1/3]

On Fri, May 24 2013, OS Engineering wrote: > Hi Jens and Kernel Gurus, [snip] Thanks for writing all of this up, but I'm afraid it misses the point somewhat. As stated previously, we have (now) two existing competing implementations in the kernel. I'm looking for justification on why YOUR solutio

EnhanceIO(TM) caching driver features [1/3]

Hi Jens and Kernel Gurus, We are submitting EnhanceIO(TM) caching driver for an inclusion in Linux kernel. It's an enterprise grade caching solution having been validated extensively in-house, in a large number of enterprise installations. It features this distinct property not found in dm-cach