On 08/03/2011 03:39, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 03/08/2011 00:09 Peter Jeremy said the following:
>> An alternative viewpoint is that this is wasteful because data is then
>> double-buffered.
>
> If you stop accessing data on disk after putting it into an application cache,
> then there would not be double-buffering, the OS is free to evict it from its
> cache.
I agree with Andriy that the OS is smart enough to manage the disk
buffer cache all on its own.
Meanwhile, another detail that I didn't include in previous messages
that I probably should have is that portmaster is already caching a
whole bunch of stuff, which is one of the reasons it's as fast as it is.
In fact, because it does a lot of this caching through environment
variables I have run into problems where attempting to run external
commands with long command lines sometimes fails because there is not
enough memory available. As a result I've been attempting to streamline
both my command lines, and what I cache. I hadn't had this complaint for
a while but I got one the other day, so it looks like I still have some
more work to do in this area.
Doug
--
Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
-- OK Go
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
