Re: putting "/tmp" to memory help
On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 09:42:24 +0100
Jochen Schulz <ml@well-adjusted.de> wrote:
> Celejar:
> >
> > I'm somewhat confused about this. My system has 2GB of RAM, and I have:
> >
> > $ uptime
> > 20:46:09 up 5 days, 5:30, 9 users, load average: 0.06, 0.09, 0.25
> >
> > $ free
> > total used free shared buffers cached
> > Mem: 2065172 1047312 1017860 0 66064 357512
> > -/+ buffers/cache: 623736 1441436
> > Swap: 1949688 102364 1847324
>
> This shows that ~620MB are used for applications and data. About 400MB
> is used for buffers/cache (don't ask me what the difference is).
>
> > $ df | grep tmp
> > tmpfs 1032584 16 1032568 1% /lib/init/rw
> > tmpfs 1032584 0 1032584 0% /dev/shm
> > none 1032584 2440 1030144 1% /tmp
> >
> > So my /tmp is using 1GB.
>
> No. Your /tmp might grow up to 1GB, but it only occupies what's really
> necessary. This is the main difference between tmpfs and a traditional
> RAM disk. Someone posted an interesting link about this topic, IIRC in
> this very thread.
But IIUC, on a linux system that's been up for a while, with moderate
usage, pretty much all available memory should be 'used', as it will be
used for disk cache if not needed by applications. So if the tmpfs
isn't reserving the full 1GB, shouldn't that memory be 'used' in the
output of 'free'?
Celejar
--
foffl.sourceforge.net - Feeds OFFLine, an offline RSS/Atom aggregator
mailmin.sourceforge.net - remote access via secure (OpenPGP) email
ssuds.sourceforge.net - A Simple Sudoku Solver and Generator
Reply to: