[SM-Discuss] Smallest Source Mage
sandalle at hellhound.homeip.net
Mon Jul 29 18:44:17 EDT 2002
> Eric Sandall said:
>> Well, one reason is that from what I've seen, the "better choice"
>> depends on whom your asking. Each side comes up with facts and
>> figures that contradict the other side. I don't use statistics for
>> just this reason, they can be used to prove anything, even contrary
> For the record, I haven't seen any statistics for the tmpfs side. I
> also haven't heard anything except unproven claims of fragmentation from
> the tmpfs side.
> I've seen several statistics showing faster times using disk access.
> While it hasn't been shown, I believe it's trivial that it uses less
The times I posted showed that tmpfs used less system time, but more user
and real time. So, having no-tmpfs is not an overall winner. And the
memory issue (I agree, has not been proven either way) will be important
to those of us using systems with little RAM (I recall someone having 8Mb
on one posting), and so is not trivial to us.
Yes, you may say, "Well, that's an antiquated machine, you should update,
computers are cheap!" Yes, they are cheap, but not all of us have the
resources to buy new machines whenever we need more speed. I use every
computer I have, and buy "junk" machines for cheap, sometimes even free,
so that I may add another computer to my cluster. Though it may not add
much, it can take a little pressure off of my server for the real services
(Counter-Strike, NeverWinter Nights, SETI at Home, etc. :)).
>> Therefore I agree with Julian and think tmpfs should be default, as
>> that's the original way. However, it would be nice to have, during
>> the initial install, a menu option to choose (similar to choosing your
>> Language, keyboard settings, timezone, etc.), but have tmpfs default
>> if they don't choose anything.
> The original way...You mean as in "Oh, well that's just the way it's
> *always* been done..."
> While you're at it, someone should put in an "add 5% to compile
> time" option for fun. ; ) Freedom of choice and all that.
> Oh wait...It's the default setting. Never mind.
The reason I said that is why change it? There are people here who
believe (even if it's wrong, which also depends on whom you're asking)
that tmpfs is the ultimate in compilation practice, while others say that
tmpfs is a waste of resources and slows everything down.
Had you read what I said you would have seen that I mention there be an
option, clearly visible (it's in the first screen with the Language and
such) for the user to choose. The default only occurs if the user chooses
not to change it.
Chris has already submitted a patch to add the choice to the sorcery menu,
now all we need is one of the ISO hackers to add the choice to the install
menu (or have an eager volunteer from the crowd <hint><hint> :)) submit
the patch to bugzilla.
Somehow, we always come back to tmpfs lately. How 'bout we just close
this door since the patch is there and have Anders or Nathan (or Chris,
someone) put this into sorcery so we can end this. Those of you whom do
not want tmpfs, fine, you can now disable tmpfs usage in sorcery, those
who do want tmpfs, also fine, just do nothing. :)
(Non important stuff...)
We do not need to bring in ludicrous statements to this discussion, such
as your 5% for fun. Do you have something against freedom of choice? If
the user has the choice, what matters if tmpfs is the default? The user
can change it if he/she wants. Go ahead and make no-tmpfs default, I
don't really care, I just want the option of choosing.
-One of Three
Eric Sandall | Source Mage GNU/Linux Developer
sandalle at hellhound.homeip.net | http://www.sourcemage.org
http://hellhound.homeip.net/~sandalle | SystAdmin @ Inst. Shock Physics @ WSU
ICQ: 667348 | http://www.shock.wsu.edu/
More information about the SM-Discuss