On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Anton Marchukov <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > The node will be offline for now until we agree on what to do. >> > An option is to abandon RAM disks completely as we didn't find >> > any performance benefits from using them so far. >> >> That's very surprising. On my case it doubles the performance, at least. >> But I assume my storage (single disk) is far slower than yours. >> > > What amount of RAM you had available to Linux file system cache and were > there any previous runs so Linux were able to put any mock caches into the > RAM cache? > I don't do mock. And if I run everything in RAM (whether directly under /dev/shm/<somewhere> or in a zram disk), I honestly don't need the Linux system cache. > > Besides the possible difference in disk speeds I think the second factor > is this Linux fs cache that basically create an analog of RAM disk on the > fly. > Well, theoretically, if you have enough RAM and you keep re-running, many of the data is indeed going to be cached. I'd argue that it's a better use of RAM to just run it there. > > Those two things might explain why we do not see any performance > improvement from RAM drives in our case. > Indeed. Y. > > Anton. > >
_______________________________________________ Infra mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra
