From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from forward5m.cmail.yandex.net ([5.255.216.23]:42152 "EHLO forward5m.cmail.yandex.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751494AbdBNBaO (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Feb 2017 20:30:14 -0500 From: Alexander Tomokhov To: Kai Krakow , "linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" In-Reply-To: <20170205232721.165e96f3@jupiter.sol.kaishome.de> References: <14453691486330921@web21h.yandex.ru> <20170205232721.165e96f3@jupiter.sol.kaishome.de> Subject: Re: Is it possible to have metadata-only device with no data? MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <1609461487035347@web31j.yandex.ru> Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 04:22:27 +0300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Yeah, thank you for suggestion. Bcache is what I actually use right now. However it's concept is different, operating at block/bucket level and requires another (underlying!) layer. 06.02.2017, 01:27, "Kai Krakow" : > Am Mon, 06 Feb 2017 00:42:01 +0300 > schrieb Alexander Tomokhov : > >>  Is it possible, having two drives to do raid1 for metadata but keep >>  data on a single drive only? -- > > No, but you could take a look into bcache which should get you > something similar if used in write-around mode. > > Random access will become cached in bcache, which should most of the > time be metadata, plus of course randomly accessed data from HDD. If > you reduce the sequential cutoff trigger in bcache, it should cache > mostly metadata only. > > -- > Regards, > Kai > > Replies to list-only preferred. > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html