From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Jul 30 14:23: 7 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from zippy.osd.bsdi.com (zippy.osd.bsdi.com [204.216.27.228]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E95A137B74D for ; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 14:23:04 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.osd.bsdi.com) Received: from localhost (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zippy.osd.bsdi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA41780; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 14:22:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.osd.bsdi.com) To: Neil Blakey-Milner Cc: Doug Barton , Ted Sikora , "freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG" Subject: Re: /tmp on a ramdisk? In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 30 Jul 2000 19:04:06 +0200." <20000730190406.A88910@mithrandr.moria.org> Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 14:22:32 -0700 Message-ID: <41777.964992152@localhost> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG 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. 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? > > > > CW on this is varied, but the current trend is that /tmp on a md is jus t a > > waste of ram, since (basically) everything in /tmp is in ram twice. > > I think that's MFS, not MD. > > Neil > -- > Neil Blakey-Milner > Sunesi Clinical Systems > nbm@mithrandr.moria.org > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message