Bug#702256: ITP: enhanceio -- dynamic block device cache for Linux
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:17 PM, Dmitry Smirnov <onlyjob@member.fsf.org> wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
>
> Package name: enhanceio
> Version: 0+git20130227-1
> Upstream Author: STEC, Inc
> URL: https://github.com/stec-inc/EnhanceIO
> License: GPL-2
> Description: dynamic block device cache for Linux
> EnhanceIO is a dynamic block level cache to improve performance of
> rotating hard disk drives by using SSDs as cache devices.
> .
> EnhanceIO derived from Flashcache project but it does not use device
> mapper and can create and delete caches while a source volume is being
> used (i.e. mounted).
> .
> EnhanceIO supports three caching modes: read-only, write-through, and
> write-back and three cache replacement policies: random, FIFO, and LRU.
>
> This source package will produce the following binary packages:
>
> * enhanceio (provides user space utility `eio_cli`)
> * enhanceio-dkms (DKMS kernel module for Linux Kernel 3.7+)
>
> Package' VCS: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/enhanceio.git
>
JFYI: In linux 3.9-rc1, dm-cache are merged to mainstream kernel,
which can be used
to replace EnahnceIO/flashcache/bcache(IMO).
commit c6b4fcbad044e6fffcc75bba160e720eb8d67d17
Author: Joe Thornber <ejt@redhat.com>
Date: Fri Mar 1 22:45:51 2013 +0000
dm: add cache target
Add a target that allows a fast device such as an SSD to be used as a
cache for a slower device such as a disk.
A plug-in architecture was chosen so that the decisions about which data
to migrate and when are delegated to interchangeable tunable policy
modules. The first general purpose module we have developed, called
"mq" (multiqueue), follows in the next patch. Other modules are
under development.
Signed-off-by: Joe Thornber <ejt@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Heinz Mauelshagen <mauelshagen@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Alasdair G Kergon <agk@redhat.com>
--
Liang Guo
http://bluestone.cublog.cn
Reply to: