Suggestion: Volumes to Cache

[magic-man]

In the main FancyCache for VOLUME screen, I suggest not displaying volumes that do not have drive letters associated with them.
It makes no sense to cache a volume that has no drive letter, since Windows does not see the volume or use it.

[support]

it was designed for a scenario such as below:
A volume was associated with a dirve letter and with FC enabled. Later user removed the drive letter but he/she forgot to disable FC. If FC doesn't show such volumes, then there's no easy way to disable FC on them unless they are associated with drive letters again.

[Bensam123]

Interesting... sorta off topic, but why would someone want to use FC for disks over volumes if the volume occupies the entire disk?

[magic-man]

Interesting... sorta off topic, but why would someone want to use FC for disks over volumes if the volume occupies the entire disk?

In my understanding, they are exactly the same. I use VOLUME since I only want to cach 1 of the 2 partitions on my SSD. I had previously used DISK when I used both partitions.

[Bensam123]

Yeah, I used disk because I thought they might've been different and I just wanted to do my whole disk anyway... My guess is they're going to be combined in the future?

[Fabian]

Let me also pose this to the group: those who use TrueCrypt, will know that there are (encrypted) volumes without drive letters, until they are mounted.
So maybe someone can speak to that scenario as well. (I run TC, but with FC DISK).

[Axel Mertes]

Many Fibre Channel SAN software drivers use non-drive letter disks and re-mount them as network shares at the same time (e.g. Tivoli SANergy and others). Its a common method.
It should be fully up to the user to decide wether a drive should be cached or not.
Don't rule out options due to not knowing better

Axel
PS: No offense intended!