I am using truecrypt and have all my drives completely encrypted. It's similar to windows bitlocker. Upon intalling fancycache it shows the volumes as strange serials and does not give any information on cluster size and stuff, only the C-drive has a proper C under volume and correctly detected cluster size. I am hesitant to enable fancycache. Notice that fancycache disk version also shows my boot drive C under volumes. That is probably because truecrypt loads before windows loads. Although the other volumes are not properly detected they do show up under SSD selection as seen in the screen capture below.
Without truecrypt there is no free space on the drives, every drive is 100% full with encrypted data. Windows Disk Management says its RAW data.
I want to enable 2nd level read caching using my SSD (C-drive) for my harddisks. Will that work or will it destroy my C drive?
Thank you for offering such a scenario.
We didn't test the program with TrueCrypt software. So I think so far it might not be good to enable FC on these encrypted drives.
Thanks for the answer. Well, I was thinking. I heard fancycache does not actually see files on a normal harddisk and it is cluster based orso. That could be excellent with encrypted data. If it is caching those clusters with 'random data' then it's working for encrypted clusters! Right? I mean, an encrypted harddrive looks like it is 100% filled with random data.
For the 2nd level cache I could separate a 10gb partition from my 80gb ssd so the boot has only 70gb and a new volume letter with 10gb. If I leave that 10gb volume unencrypted I think fancycache could work with that. Or am I missing something here?
I think the main issue is that since both FancyCache and TrueCrypt are filter drivers and therefore exist at the same level (block), you cannot simply intercept the data from the TrueCrypt filter driver and send it to FancyCache, which is a block driver. Well, theoretically I guess you can, but the performance would be terrible.
Okay, I will post some tests-results on the matter of FancyCache being used on encrypted (namely TrueCrypt) partitions.
I have been using FC since version 0.3 beta, on volume sizes from 1TB and up, containing various TC partitions.
My current setup: FC DISK 0.5 beta, Win7x64, 12GB Ram, 2TB Raid - some TC partitions, etc. Machine is running for weeks at a time.
Guys, just installed the FC Disk 0.6 on the aforementioned configuration, and I still get solid results from all partitions (regular and encrypted).
Sustained copy transfer rates of ~130MB/s and once cached, it even flies up to 600MB-1.7GB
Don't have disk bench software on the rig right now, so cant provide more (uniform or detailed) results. But take it from me, since 0.3 it has been working on all partitions.
I have no noticeable performance difference between partitions.
I have no compatibility/stability issues with FC Disk 0.3, 0.4, 0.5 (now testing 0.6) and TrueCrypt 6.0, 7.0, 7.0a.
(corrected 600MB typo)
Last edited by Fabian on Mon Mar 07, 2011 4:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
Fabian wrote:
I have been using FC since version 0.3 beta, on volume sizes from 1TB and up, containing various TC partitions.
Hi Fabian, thanks for testing man! Excellent. Sorry for asking but my machine is a work pc, therefore could you answer these questions too please?
1. Do you use volume or disk fancycache?
2. Do you use read/write caching strategy or only read?
3. Do you use an encrypted partition for the level-2 cache?
Wow, its been a while but for completion I will still respond to the thread:
1. Fancycache DISK
2. Been using both R/W, R only, W only at some points in time. All depending on the main activities I undertake. Generally I run it most often at R/W, or W only using between 2-4GB. (12GB RAM, Win2008R2, 2TB RAID, i7-920)
3. Never used the 2nd level cache option; no SSD or "invisible memory".
