| 1 |
On Wed, 28 Apr 2021 23:05:35 +0100, antlists wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> > There have been several tests posted over the years that show that |
| 4 |
> > using a tmpfs for TMPDIR doesn't give as much of a gain as you would |
| 5 |
> > expect. With NVMe drives, the difference is likely to be even |
| 6 |
> > smaller. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> But that's not the only reason for a tmpfs. I guess the reason tmpfs |
| 9 |
> doesn't necessarily give much gain is because linux caches everything |
| 10 |
> so it's quite possible stuff never gets written to disk. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Agreed, but I was only responding to the comment that building on an SSD |
| 13 |
was no slower than tmpfs. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> And I know gentoo does clean up behind itself, but I use tmpfs so the |
| 16 |
> system cleans up behind it too, and it's got as much room as it needs. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I can't agree with the second part, a tmpfs has far less space than a |
| 19 |
disk. I had a gcc build fail this morning when /tmp filled up. Not |
| 20 |
because gcc needs more than I had but because another emerge had failed |
| 21 |
and left a G or two in /tmp. You'll always have more disk space than |
| 22 |
RAM - embedded aside. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Forget the Joneses...I can't keep up with The Simpsons. |
Archives