Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2011 00:35:30 +0200 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: is TMPFS still highly experimental? Message-ID: <j6aovi$hf0$2@dough.gmane.org> In-Reply-To: <CALfReycp1WBORhtPGdZuEKVoD%2Be1QEoUAo=-ScNPrSX1GUuQNw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAOfDtXMm9K_fbOmvG2gvXxDfKakkgpPt9MLifqDxa4wCibMExg@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.GSO.1.10.1110011122030.882@multics.mit.edu> <CADLo83-s_3H8PbbxOPPxbe0m10U0U5JW-feB294dFs%2BQ3iTWvg@mail.gmail.com> <CAGMYy3ssi%2BkAuufDTHA1z6u7jRrZwRRkCCkcO94GHNGF9Rku_w@mail.gmail.com> <20111002020231.GA70864@icarus.home.lan> <CADLo839qN8k0UJvSS5TQAB4yfDCBWQ=EkuKpdtmMV19xECME4w@mail.gmail.com> <CALfReycp1WBORhtPGdZuEKVoD%2Be1QEoUAo=-ScNPrSX1GUuQNw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02/10/2011 11:01, krad wrote: > It may seem a silly question, but I have been wondering about tmpfs and zfs, > and whether there is any point to mixing the two? > > Surely if you have frequently accessed files under /tmp they are going to be > in the arc or l2arc anyway so fairly speedy, or am I missing the point of > tmpfs? You use it when you want to be more certain that your data will never touch a drive. It's not only for short lived files.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?j6aovi$hf0$2>