来源: 2017-02-12 22:51:30 [] [博客] [旧帖] [给我悄悄话] 本文已被阅读: 次 (3545 bytes)
本文内容已被 [ hot_powerz ] 在 2017-02-12 23:17:35 编辑过。如有问题,请报告版主或论坛管理删除.
回答: Primocache 和 eboostr 的比较Oneshotkill2017-02-12 10:04:00


这是别人总结的几点有别于WINDOWS CACHE的地方。(一行是卖点,另外一行是反驳的意见)

  • Some applications can bypass Windows cache but cannot bypass PrimoCache because PrimoCache runs at a lower level in Windows.

So an application is written to bypass cache for data safety, but let's stick it in RAM anyway because screw data protection.

  • Windows caches all data, while PrimoCache can cache on behalf of a specified volume in which users are interested. Given same size of system memory, the latter has a higher hit-rate.

Windows is not going to cache stuff that people don't request or that isn't needed for the OS.

  • PrimoCache supports persistent SSD caching for mechanical hard disks, improving system boot-up time and applications loading time. Windows cache cannot.

Storage Spaces.

  • PrimoCache can customize write-deferred mode, while Windows cache cannot.

See first point.

  • PrimoCache can make use of Invisible Memory on 32-bit Windows as cache, overcoming the Windows limits on amount of system memory.


Interesting:-) -Oneshotkill- 给 Oneshotkill 发送悄悄话 Oneshotkill 的个人群组 (0 bytes) () 02/12/2017 postreply 22:53:49


  • 笔名:      密码: 保持登录状态一个月,直到我退出登录。
  • 标题:
  • 内容(可选项): [所见即所得|预览模式] [HTML源代码] [如何上传图片] [怎样发视频] [如何贴音乐]