On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 05:03:55 -0500, Dale wrote:

> >> You miss this point not me.  I *cleared* that cache.  From
> >> kernel.org:  
> > Sorry Dale, but you are missing the point. You cleared the cache
> > before running emerge, then ran emerge. The first thing emerge did
> > was unpack the tarball and populate the disk cache. All clearing the
> > disk cache did was make sure there was plenty of space to cache the
> > new data, thus speeding up the process.

> Then explain to me why it was at times slower while on tmpfs?  Trust me,
> I ran this test many times and in different orders and it did NOT make
> much if any difference.

So it was slower at times, but not by much? That's just general variances
caused by multi-tasking, wind direction etc.
 
> I might add, the cache on the drive I was using is nowhere near large
> enough to cache the tarball for the package.  Heck, the cache on my
> current system drive is only 8Mbs according to hdparm.

We're not talking about drive caches, the kernel caches filesystem access
long before it gets anywhere the drive. So all the real work is done in
RAM if you have enough, whether you are using a hard drive filesystem or
tmpfs. All your test demonstrates is that if you have enough RAM, it
doesn't make much difference where you put PORTAGE_TMPDIR.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Evolution stops when stupidity is no longer fatal!

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to