From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Dec 14 13:31:45 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from news-ma.rhein-neckar.de (news-ma.rhein-neckar.de [193.197.90.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B9D6150F8 for ; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 13:31:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from daemon@bigeye.rhein-neckar.de) Received: from bigeye.rhein-neckar.de (uucp@localhost) by news-ma.rhein-neckar.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with bsmtp id WAA27449 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 22:31:33 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from daemon@bigeye.rhein-neckar.de) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by bigeye.rhein-neckar.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA42133 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 22:02:46 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from daemon) From: naddy@mips.rhein-neckar.de (Christian Weisgerber) Subject: Re: MFS vs softupdates Date: 14 Dec 1999 22:02:46 +0100 Message-ID: <836b9m$194a$1@bigeye.rhein-neckar.de> References: To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Jonathon McKitrick wrote: > On a laptop with 64 megs of RAM, what makes more sense for performance > improvements: softupdates or linking swap to a MFS ramdisk? I'm not sure what you mean by "linking swap to a MFS ramdisk". If you are talking about putting /tmp on an MFS filesystem, which in return resides in virtual memory, then the answer to your question is "both". I'm using softupdates and /tmp on MFS as a matter of course. -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy@mips.rhein-neckar.de To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message