Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 18:02:39 -0700 From: Xin LI <delphij@gmail.com> To: Chris Rees <crees@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, delphij@freebsd.org Subject: Re: is TMPFS still highly experimental? Message-ID: <CAGMYy3ssi%2BkAuufDTHA1z6u7jRrZwRRkCCkcO94GHNGF9Rku_w@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CADLo83-s_3H8PbbxOPPxbe0m10U0U5JW-feB294dFs%2BQ3iTWvg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAOfDtXMm9K_fbOmvG2gvXxDfKakkgpPt9MLifqDxa4wCibMExg@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.GSO.1.10.1110011122030.882@multics.mit.edu> <CADLo83-s_3H8PbbxOPPxbe0m10U0U5JW-feB294dFs%2BQ3iTWvg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 8:48 AM, Chris Rees <crees@freebsd.org> wrote: > I've also not heard of anyone using it with zfs successfully- it tends to > shrink rapidly. I'm quite surprised with this assertion. I use tmpfs on my own system and I never see such problem as long as one have sufficient swap space. Not to say there is no problem --there is no way to say "commit this amount of memory to ZFS" but really I have never hit this exact alleged problem... Cheers, -- Xin LI <delphij@delphij.net> https://www.delphij.net/ FreeBSD - The Power to Serve! Live free or die
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGMYy3ssi%2BkAuufDTHA1z6u7jRrZwRRkCCkcO94GHNGF9Rku_w>