1 |
Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: |
2 |
> The 06/09/12, Dale wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
>> But this is what you guys are missing too. If you want to use tmpfs, |
5 |
>> you have to have enough ram to begin with. Whether you use tmpfs or |
6 |
>> not, you have to have enough ram to do the compile otherwise you start |
7 |
>> using swap or it just crashes. Having ram is a prerequisite to using |
8 |
>> tmpfs. |
9 |
> This is too minimal overview to get the point. Memory is not a static |
10 |
> place. This is not a cake beeing shared once. Memory is living. See my |
11 |
> other mail. |
12 |
|
13 |
I understand that memory is static but that is NOT what I was testing or |
14 |
others either. The test it whether putting portage's work directory on |
15 |
tmpfs makes emerges faster not whether emerge using memory itself makes |
16 |
it faster. Since when you run emerge it loads everything into ram, |
17 |
regardless of whether portages work directory is on tmpfs or not, it |
18 |
doesn't matter. This test is NOT about portage loading things into ram |
19 |
WHILE emerging, it was about having the work directory on tmpfs and |
20 |
speed. Since emerge loads everything right after you hit the enter key, |
21 |
it doesn't matter where the work directory is located. |
22 |
|
23 |
We wanted to change only one thing for this test, where portage's work |
24 |
directory was. It was not about how much ram a system has but where |
25 |
tmpfs was located. To use tmpfs, the system has to have enough ram to |
26 |
begin with so systems that do not have larger amounts of ram were not |
27 |
even relevant to the question. If a system has small amounts of ram, |
28 |
then most likely they can't use tmpfs anyway. |
29 |
|
30 |
>> There is another flaw in your assumption above. I already had the |
31 |
>> tarballs downloaded BEFORE even the first emerge. |
32 |
> This is not a flaw in assumption. This is negligible. |
33 |
|
34 |
It can make a huge difference. The download times are included in the |
35 |
emerge times if it is not already in distfiles. So, if a tarball takes |
36 |
a hour to download, it adds one hour to the emerge time. Depending on |
37 |
internet speed, it can be more than negligible. I have DSL but it is |
38 |
the slower package so this can in some cases make a HUGE difference |
39 |
here. Since I was running my tests here, I know it makes a difference |
40 |
but you assumed it didn't. That would be incorrect. It does make a |
41 |
difference and it can be a big one depending on the tarball size. |
42 |
|
43 |
> |
44 |
>> What the people wanted to test is if putting portages work directory on |
45 |
>> tmpfs would make emerge times faster. |
46 |
> Come'on. We all understood your goal from the beginning. |
47 |
|
48 |
Well great. We, and I, were only testing one thing not two or three |
49 |
things. We just wanted to change one setting, not disable a whole bunch |
50 |
of stuff. |
51 |
|
52 |
|
53 |
> |
54 |
>> Do we all admit that having portage on tmpfs does not make emerge times |
55 |
>> faster yet? |
56 |
> No. It depends on factors and underlying processes you claim they don't |
57 |
> matter, which is wrong. They *might* be not relevant in some cases. |
58 |
> |
59 |
|
60 |
Actually, they don't matter on my system and since others got the same |
61 |
results, it doesn't matter. Again, we only wanted to change one |
62 |
specific setting, tmpfs, nothing else. That was the only thing we were |
63 |
testing and it was the only thing I tested here and it is the only |
64 |
results I am reporting. I'm not reporting on how well emerge is using |
65 |
ram after the command is given. |
66 |
|
67 |
So, accept it or not, it makes no difference whether portage's work |
68 |
directory is on tmpfs or not speed wise. You get the same results |
69 |
either way. In the case of the OP of this thread, it would likely be a |
70 |
good idea if he can but he should not expect emerge to be any faster. |
71 |
|
72 |
Dale |
73 |
|
74 |
:-) :-) |
75 |
|
76 |
-- |
77 |
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words! |