On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 06:31:24 -0500, Dale wrote: > Not quite. The theory is that if you put portages work directory on > tmpfs, then all the writes and such are done in ram which is faster. If > you have portages work directory on disk, it will be slower because the > disk is slower.
But the disk is not used when you have enough RAM to keep everything cached. So you are comparing the speed of storing all files in RAM with the speed of storing all files in RAM, so it is hardly surprising that the two tests give similar results. The fact that in one scenario the files do end up on disk is irrelevant, you are working from RAM copies of the files in both instances. By running the test on a lightly loaded machine, you are also removing the possibility of files being flushed from the cache in the tmpdir-on-disk setup, so I would expect you to get comparable results either way. The only real benefit of using tmpfs is the one you mentioned elsewhere, that the disks don't get bothered at all. -- Neil Bothwick Is there another word for synonym?
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
