Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Why shm fs (Was [2.3.51pre2] wrong shm_statfs in ipc/shm.c) | From | Christoph Rohland <> | Date | 10 Mar 2000 21:49:43 +0100 |
| |
Jamie Lokier <lk@tantalophile.demon.co.uk> writes: > Sounds exceedingly similar to the tmpfs idea (from Solaris) -- put /tmp > in swap. Can you use shmfs in that way? I.e., just mount it on /tmp?
Yes it is like tmpfs. E.g. Solaris implements posix shm with tmpfs like we do with shm fs.
But shm fs is also missing many features like directories, read/write support for files, etc. So in the current state it is only usable for shared memory. But it could be extended later. I am not sure if it really makes sense. We have a very efficient cache and I once used a RAM disk for /tmp and did not see a performance increase.
Greetings Christoph
- 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/
| |