If you wanted to use Fancycache with a machine that is running expresscache linked to a 8gb SDD (ie Samsung series 7), would their be any compatibilty issues.
Why would you want to do this? Fast boots (Expresscache) and stupidly fast application loading and use (Fancycache).
Perhaps one possible future option would be to allow Expresscache to cache boot data in L2 cache. Then you would have the best of both worlds!
Compatible with expresscache?
Re: Compatible with expresscache?
No there would not be far as I know. Long as it shows up as a drive. FC doesn't really care what it is
You can't increase "boot" times all that much as 70% of the wait is usally from the IO checking and not the loading of the OS usally. Even if you did, you would still have to raid the data as no drivers or software can be loaded before the OS it self (not saying it isn't possiable, but now you are looking at a big headace and maybe even data issue later on). Again, even if you did that, now a larg part of your SSD will not be usable as it will have to hold the startup information staticly.
At least for desktop anyways. Most people only reboot their pc maybe once a day or even once a week. In this case, you're just wasting time on a feature that may only get used a few times.
Now on laptops, it could benfit from it, but then again, I question why are you just not replacing the hard drive for the SSD instead as the SSD will offer more battery life boost than making the SSD as the cache drive. What is faster and takes less power: 1 SSD running with maybe accessing files from the HDD (on reboot and normal start up), or HDD+SSD running at the same time as the HDD is slow and WILL access the SSD to speed boost it? The answer would be the 1 SSD. ^^
Should be able to do that in the next few future releases. May want to look at my post here: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=1215
It offers some ideas that the community came up with. I am perty sure number 4 is what you're asking for.
If you feel otherwise, please request it on that thread with a bit more detail into how it'll work. If it sounds good, I'll add it to the list
You can't increase "boot" times all that much as 70% of the wait is usally from the IO checking and not the loading of the OS usally. Even if you did, you would still have to raid the data as no drivers or software can be loaded before the OS it self (not saying it isn't possiable, but now you are looking at a big headace and maybe even data issue later on). Again, even if you did that, now a larg part of your SSD will not be usable as it will have to hold the startup information staticly.
At least for desktop anyways. Most people only reboot their pc maybe once a day or even once a week. In this case, you're just wasting time on a feature that may only get used a few times.
Now on laptops, it could benfit from it, but then again, I question why are you just not replacing the hard drive for the SSD instead as the SSD will offer more battery life boost than making the SSD as the cache drive. What is faster and takes less power: 1 SSD running with maybe accessing files from the HDD (on reboot and normal start up), or HDD+SSD running at the same time as the HDD is slow and WILL access the SSD to speed boost it? The answer would be the 1 SSD. ^^
Should be able to do that in the next few future releases. May want to look at my post here: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=1215
It offers some ideas that the community came up with. I am perty sure number 4 is what you're asking for.
If you feel otherwise, please request it on that thread with a bit more detail into how it'll work. If it sounds good, I'll add it to the list