Re: Memory Mapped Filesystem

From: bert hubert (ahu@ds9a.nl)
Date: Wed Mar 22 2000 - 09:42:35 EST

Next message: Marco Colombo: "Re: Some questions about linux kernel."
Previous message: Christopher W. Fisher: "compile problem with #define CONFIG_AWE32_MIXER in 2.3.99pre3-6"
In reply to: Jim Nance: "Re: Memory Mapped Filesystem"
Next in thread: Jeff Garzik: "Re: Memory Mapped Filesystem"
Reply: Jeff Garzik: "Re: Memory Mapped Filesystem"
Reply: Rik van Riel: "Re: Memory Mapped Filesystem"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 08:01:16AM -0500, Jim Nance wrote:

> I have done some benchmarks which show that Linux does not need a tmpfs like
> filesystem for performance. The benchmark numbers were in one of the linux
> FAQs at one time, but I dont remember which one.

Matt Dillon of freebsd & diablo fame claims that their 'mfs' is still an
order of magnitude faster, so tmpfs may have some merit yet.

I saw a benchmark on this, but neither google, altavista, freebsd.org or
dejanews seem to turn it up.

Regards,

bert hubert

-- | http://www.rent-a-nerd.nl | | - U N I X - | Inspice et cautus eris - D11T'95

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Marco Colombo: "Re: Some questions about linux kernel."
Previous message: Christopher W. Fisher: "compile problem with #define CONFIG_AWE32_MIXER in 2.3.99pre3-6"
In reply to: Jim Nance: "Re: Memory Mapped Filesystem"
Next in thread: Jeff Garzik: "Re: Memory Mapped Filesystem"
Reply: Jeff Garzik: "Re: Memory Mapped Filesystem"
Reply: Rik van Riel: "Re: Memory Mapped Filesystem"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 23 2000 - 21:00:36 EST