4 ms·
I can't view the oracle link (http://www.oracle.com/splash/rpls/embargoed.html http://www.oracle.com/splash/rpls/embargoed.html) - it's something enterprisy I'm
by pooriaazimi 14y ago
I can't view the oracle link (http://www.oracle.com/splash/rpls/embargoed.html http://www.oracle.com/splash/rpls/embargoed.html) - it's something enterprisy I'm sure, so it's even more expensive than FusionDrive (with much better support and more features), but the Linux thing you linked is a caching system, which FusionDrive is not.
> Fusion drive is effectively a caching system.
Oh... No, it's not. It's a block-level tiering solution which (mostly) promotes important "blocks" automatically and intelligently when computer is idle (so as not to slow things down when the user is working).
Very, very different from caching, very different technology (Apple has been working on CoreStorage, Apple's logical volume manager for years).
Ars article[1] has more info.
[1]: http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/10/more-on-fusion-drive-how-it-works-and-how-to-roll-your-own/ http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/10/more-on-fusion-drive-ho...
- mercurial 14y agoThanks for the Ars link, very informative. Based on this article, it looks more like a kind of intelligent, dynamic RAID0 than a cache, which makes me dubitative with regards to its reliability (talk about multiplying SPOFs...). I'd rather go for a smaller SSD holding the system in this case.
- allerratio 14y agoI didn't say it's an cache system. I said that it effectively is a caching system. You won't notice much difference to a write back cache.