forgive my late reply.. Just trying to catch up..
Given all of the above statements, why does BSD/OS (at least on 4.0 and 4.1)
want to set up tmp as a Ramdisk? I don't even think there is a way around it
during the install.
Nicole
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000, Doug Barton wrote:
Ted Sikora wrote:
A while ago several people suggested using /tmp on a ramdisk along with
softupdates. Right now I am running several production servers with
4.1-STABLE with softupdates. I'm really happy with the performance. What
benefits would I
On Fri 2000-07-28 (17:23), Doug Barton wrote:
Ted Sikora wrote:
A while ago several people suggested using /tmp on a ramdisk along with
softupdates. Right now I am running several production servers with
4.1-STABLE with softupdates. I'm really happy with the performance. What
benefits
Adam wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000, Doug Barton wrote:
Ted Sikora wrote:
A while ago several people suggested using /tmp on a ramdisk along with
softupdates. Right now I am running several production servers with
4.1-STABLE with softupdates. I'm really happy with the performance. What
On Sun, 30 Jul 2000, Doug Barton wrote:
Adam wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000, Doug Barton wrote:
Ted Sikora wrote:
A while ago several people suggested using /tmp on a ramdisk along with
softupdates. Right now I am running several production servers with
4.1-STABLE with softupdates. I'm
The issue is that mount_mfs is simply newfs with a catch: it
constructs the new filesystem completely in memory and lives on as
the storage for the mounted filesystem. If you view the processes on
a system using MFS, you will notice that one of them is the original
mount_mfs, having become a
On Sun, 30 Jul 2000, Brian Fundakowski Feldman wrote:
Yes, things are stored twice in memory: once in the buffer cache and
once in the MFS process. Yes, they are also copied multiple times.
MFS simply can't perform as well as you might expect. The malloc disk
device can because it simply
On Sun, 30 Jul 2000, Michael Bacarella wrote:
This is more out of curiousity than criticism;
..but why not just make a charecter device that corresponds to a chunk
of VM and simply run newfs on that?
You would still have a relatively proven filesystem (like FFS) and you
also get the
MD has supplanted MFS, it doesn't run in conjunction with it.
Just consider MD the new name for MFS if it makes it easier.
- Jordan
On Fri 2000-07-28 (17:23), Doug Barton wrote:
Ted Sikora wrote:
A while ago several people suggested using /tmp on a ramdisk along with
softupdates
In message 41777.964992152@localhost, "Jordan K. Hubbard" writes:
MD has supplanted MFS, it doesn't run in conjunction with it.
Just consider MD the new name for MFS if it makes it easier.
Not *quite* true. MD and VN has supplanted MFS.
For "boot with this ram-disk" it's MD, for "put my /tmp
Ted Sikora wrote:
A while ago several people suggested using /tmp on a ramdisk along with
softupdates. Right now I am running several production servers with
4.1-STABLE with softupdates. I'm really happy with the performance. What
benefits would I realize using /tmp on a ramdisk
11 matches
Mail list logo
