Re: thoughts about adding tmpfs support to live-helper
On 24 May 2010 15:44, Tzafrir Cohen <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Given that it should include roughtly 5 times the size the the binary
> image (or even more), 16MB surely isn't enough. I can't think of a way
> to get a reasonable estimate of it in advance. Note, however, that you
> can specify say, 'size=20%', which will use 20% of the size of your
> physical memory. The default, if no size option is given, is to use up
> to 50% of the physical memory.
I think something like 200% is reasonable given enough swap.
tmpfs tends to be faster than real filesystem even when using disk
because it is not concerned with consistence. Ensuring consistence of
the on-disk state is what hinders performance of most filesystems but
it is required for the filesystem to be of any use for permanent data