On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 12:32:40PM -1000, Clifton Royston wrote: > I have seen some conflicting information posted about this in the > past, and I figure this is the best place to get an authoritative > answer. > > For a large temporary file system which must hold short-lived files, > mostly small but occasionally several very large ones (e.g. 100MB+), is > it better for performance and stability if this file system: > > 1) resides on a swap-backed MFS and trusts the OS to swap out > low-priority blocks if needed under RAM pressure, or > > 2) on a regular UFS and trusts the OS to buffer as many blocks as > possible into RAM when RAM is free?
You can also use md(4). In my case I use it for /tmp. -ip -- The best shots happen immediately after the last frame is exposed. _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
