Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ccut!titcca!cc.titech.ac.jp!necom830!mohta
From: mohta@necom830.cc.titech.ac.jp (Masataka Ohta)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Real disk FASTER than Ram disk
Message-ID: <5488@titcce.cc.titech.ac.jp>
Date: 31 May 90 11:51:08 GMT
References: <641@sibyl.eleceng.ua.OZ> <136299@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <1990May27.210935.8564@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <3402@auspex.auspex.com>
Sender: news@cc.titech.ac.jp
Reply-To: mohta@necom830.cc.titech.ac.jp (Masataka Ohta)
Organization: Tokyo Institute of Technology
Lines: 16

In article <3402@auspex.auspex.com>
	guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris) writes:

>No, it first showed up in 4.1.  It's more of a "RAM file system" than a
>"RAM disk", as it plugs into the VFS interface.  It's also more of a
>"RAM+swap space file system", as the data in the file system lives in
>virtual memory, rather than physical memory, and can be paged out to
>swap space. 

Then, what if, when there are two processes, one is heavily using
real memory and one is heavily performing IO to tmpfs?

Isn't a large amount of real memory unnecessarily allocated to the
latter process?

						Masataka Ohta