Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 15:00:31 +0200 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr> To: ticso@cicely.de Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Softupdates a mount option? Message-ID: <40B5E66F.7000507@fer.hr> In-Reply-To: <20040527124512.GV63479@cicely12.cicely.de> References: <40B4ECC8.50808@fer.hr> <20040526202849.GA37162@freebie.xs4all.nl> <40B519DA.7000708@fer.hr> <20040527120819.B8434@gamplex.bde.org> <40B5DE26.4040901@fer.hr> <20040527124512.GV63479@cicely12.cicely.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bernd Walter wrote:
>>>It makes sense to never enable soft updates on a memory drive, since soft
>>>updates uses extra CPU cycles to try to speed up i/o to real drives (and
>>
>>Then maybe the default should be changed?
>>
>>From 'man mdmfs':
>> By default, mdmfs creates a swap-based (MD_SWAP) disk with soft-updates
>> enabled and mounts it on mount-point.
>
>
> swap != ram
> SU makes perfectly sense for swap backed md drives.
I always thought the "swap backed" meant the memory is allocated from the
same pool as for userland applications, e.g. they only get swapped out if
memory is scarce. Is this wrong?
--
Every sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology
- Arthur C Anticlarke
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?40B5E66F.7000507>