On 2 July 2013 20:20, Toby Corkindale <toby.corkindale@strategicdata.com.au> wrote: <...>
Having looked at it a bit more, it seems better suited to the SSD-caching scenario than ZFS; there are auto-tuning parameters in bcache to detect at what point to just bypass the cache and go straight to the disks, saving more cache room for blocks that will benefit.
This is precisely what the ZFS L2ARC is supposed to do.
And the write-ahead logging is limited only by the size of the cache.(Whereas ZFS' ZIL can't grow very large)
I don't know enough about bcache writes to make a comparison, but the maximum ZIL size would only be dictated by write throughput. At least bcache is filesystem agnostic and doesn't suffer from the NIH syndrome. -- Joel Shea <jwshea@gmail.com>