[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: i-ram vs. tmpfs (was: Re: Mail clustering)

> > On Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 07:10:30PM -0400, Matt Cuttler wrote:
> > > OTOH, it'd be interesting to see how this i-ram card would perform as
> > > swap space

> On Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 11:50:00PM +0000, Andy Smith wrote:
> > If you have 4G of RAM to put in an i-RAM then why would you use it
> > as swap?  If your machine swaps, use the 4G as real RAM!

On 05.04.07 10:05, Craig Sanders wrote:
> exactly.

Are you both sure that the speed of accessing the data thgourh SATA
interface won't slow down your system more than using it as swap device
in addition to journals?

> > I'd say the killer application for i-RAM is something like holding
> > external journals of other filesystems.
> yep, that and postfix (or other MTA) queues.

especially with data journalling I'd say.

> BTW, from what i've heard, there isn't much difference between using
> an I-RAM as an external journal and using any reasonably fast disk
> drive. i.e. using any external journal device gives you most of the
> benefit, after that it's diminishing returns. and a new hard disk is a
> lot cheaper than an I-RAM. about $50 AUD for a brand-new 80GB drive,
> which is about the smallest drive you can get nowadays.

That's possible, but it adds some reliability contrary to other devices.

> i.e. spend $50 on a new SATA drive for the external journal device
> and get 80-90% of the performance improvement that you would get for
> spending $500 on a 4GB I-RAM.

the problem is probably the SATA bus speed... but even you say it's faster :)

Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
He who laughs last thinks slowest. 

Reply to: