>On Jun 11, 2013 11:06 AM, "OS Engineering" wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jens,
>>
>> In continuation with our previous communication, we have carried out
>> performance comparison among EnhanceIO, bcache and dm-cache.
>How reproducible are these results? Any
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 6:29 AM, Joe Thornber wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 03:05:07PM +, OS Engineering wrote:
>
> ...
>
>> Dm-cache commits on-disk metadata every time a REQ_SYNC or REQ_FUA
>> bio is written. If no such requests are made then it commits
>> metadata once every second. If p
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 03:05:07PM +, OS Engineering wrote:
...
> Dm-cache commits on-disk metadata every time a REQ_SYNC or REQ_FUA
> bio is written. If no such requests are made then it commits
> metadata once every second. If power is lost, it may lose some
> recent writes.
Not true (thou
alasubramaniyan; Amit Phansalkar
> Subject: Re: Performance Comparison among EnhanceIO, bcache and dm-
> cache.
>
> On Tuesday 11 Jun 2013, OS Engineering wrote:
> > Hi Jens,
> >
> > In continuation with our previous communication, we have carried out
> > pe
On Tuesday 11 Jun 2013, OS Engineering wrote:
> Hi Jens,
>
> In continuation with our previous communication, we have carried out
> performance comparison among EnhanceIO, bcache and dm-cache.
>
> We found that EnhanceIO provides better throughput on zipf workload (wi
Hi Jens,
In continuation with our previous communication, we have carried out
performance comparison among EnhanceIO, bcache and dm-cache.
We found that EnhanceIO provides better throughput on zipf workload (with
theta=1.2) in comparison to bcache and dm-cache for write through caches.
However
6 matches
Mail list logo
