On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 02:59:28PM -0700, Tracy R Reed wrote:
I really like this idea. Memory is plentiful and cheap. Good hardware is quite reliable these days and if you put a UPS behind it I could conceive of eventually putting a production database or some other seek-heavy application on such a storage system.
I'm not seeing how this isn't just a poorer way of implementing caching. There's nothing novel here, except that it requires full memory for the size of the disk, instead of using it dynamically. There are also a lot of very important ordering issues with cachine and disk that likely mean that actually loss with this system would be completely catastrophic. Almost makes me want to re-subscribe to LKML just to see the idea thrashed. David -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
