Hacker News Reader

Comment by allerratio | Hacker News Reader

> If it's just a minor software tweak, then I (in good heart) suggest the author to quit his job and create an equivalent for Linux/Windows and sell it for half what Apple sells FusionDrives and make a huge amount of money.

http://bcache.evilpiepirate.org for Linux

https://blogs.oracle.com/brendan/entry/test for ZFS

And yes, Fusion drive is effectively a caching system.

View on HN

I can't view the oracle link (http://www.oracle.com/splash/rpls/embargoed.html) - it's something enterprisy I'm sure, so it's even more expensive than FusionDrive (with much better support and more features), but the Linux thing you linked is a caching system, which FusionDrive is not.

> Fusion drive is effectively a caching system.

Oh... No, it's not. It's a block-level tiering solution which (mostly) promotes important "blocks" automatically and intelligently when computer is idle (so as not to slow things down when the user is working).

Very, very different from caching, very different technology (Apple has been working on CoreStorage, Apple's logical volume manager for years).

Ars article[1] has more info.

[1]: http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/10/more-on-fusion-drive-ho...

Thanks for the Ars link, very informative. Based on this article, it looks more like a kind of intelligent, dynamic RAID0 than a cache, which makes me dubitative with regards to its reliability (talk about multiplying SPOFs...). I'd rather go for a smaller SSD holding the system in this case.

I didn't say it's an cache system. I said that it effectively is a caching system. You won't notice much difference to a write back cache.

@taligent: You're hellbanned, it seems!!!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com