Another way of prefetch?

Suggestions around PrimoCache
Post Reply
points
Level 5
Level 5
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2016 10:51 am

Another way of prefetch?

Post by points »

On a cache task with L1 and L2 storage I observe the L1 cache almost full with 6 Gb of data while the L2 storage is only filled with 2 Gb and still has plenty of space available.

Now when I restart the computer I will lose 6 Gb cache content L1 storage while only 2 Gb of L2 storage will be preserved. This means the 6 GB have to be loaded from the slow HDD again.
Wouldn't it make sense to mirror L1 storage to L2 as long as there is space available and load this content from L2 storage instead of slow HDD into L1 on reboot?
User avatar
Support
Support Team
Support Team
Posts: 3623
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:42 am

Re: Another way of prefetch?

Post by Support »

L2 cache also contains L1 read-data. This has already been implemented.
points
Level 5
Level 5
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2016 10:51 am

Re: Another way of prefetch?

Post by points »

support wrote: Fri May 31, 2019 7:40 am L2 cache also contains L1 read-data. This has already been implemented.
But why is it so much less? My 6GB RAM cache is full, while not even 2 GB of L2Storage are occupied. That's why I have suggested to mirror L1 to L2 to have those content available on restart quicker than loading them from a regular HDD.
User avatar
Support
Support Team
Support Team
Posts: 3623
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:42 am

Re: Another way of prefetch?

Post by Support »

It is possible that L1 cache contains the write-data which will not be copied to L2 by default. Another possibility is that L2 was still populating the data.
points
Level 5
Level 5
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2016 10:51 am

Re: Another way of prefetch?

Post by points »

support wrote: Fri May 31, 2019 4:50 pm It is possible that L1 cache contains the write-data which will not be copied to L2 by default. Another possibility is that L2 was still populating the data.
If it was the write data, it should not act this way with a read only cache I guess. I will check this out.
Post Reply