From nobody Sat Sep 27 18:06:01 2025 X-Original-To: current@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4cYwPJ38d9z68SnT for ; Sat, 27 Sep 2025 18:06:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp) Received: from www121.sakura.ne.jp (www121.sakura.ne.jp [153.125.133.21]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4cYwPH635Zz3PBQ; Sat, 27 Sep 2025 18:06:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: from kalamity.joker.local (124-18-6-240.area1c.commufa.jp [124.18.6.240]) (authenticated bits=0) by www121.sakura.ne.jp (8.18.1/8.17.1/[SAKURA-WEB]/20201212) with ESMTPA id 58RI622r028247; Sun, 28 Sep 2025 03:06:04 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=dec.sakura.ne.jp; s=s2405; t=1758996365; bh=lwlyFYnp18pz4G6NF30Q5upxWWjizbHDrUKDV6SSFNE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=eKQpYGGwKiRivciFaNJ655826E9jZk6Ka3JM/5XMNFXWk9d5dVsM41Gt5z0FARQFm 2FAsjmwB+dQ/qsBJ84u5aQr8yzJHk+0N7voTCQTHUKHYFTgg17YcBk4auNeesBnsXg JDO7TZQgkeKBfqUy4gtm6NwxrgyGLqcrouop78ho= Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2025 03:06:01 +0900 From: Tomoaki AOKI To: Tomek CEDRO Cc: Andriy Gapon , FreeBSD Current Subject: Re: rc.d/tmp: tmpfs support not entirely complete? Message-Id: <20250928030601.8489ed419f642d6f5c4b50b6@dec.sakura.ne.jp> In-Reply-To: References: Organization: Junchoon corps X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.33; amd64-portbld-freebsd15.0) List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[] X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4cYwPH635Zz3PBQ On Sat, 27 Sep 2025 18:02:54 +0200 Tomek CEDRO wrote: > one question here by the way is md faster than tmpfs? i find tmpfs a bit > slow.. > > -- > CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info My understanding is that both are different in their purpose. md acts as virtual "disk", backed by disk image like *.iso, and needed to be mounted as the backed filesystem (if the image is partitioned, mount the partition as the defined filesystem type, like FAT, UFS, ...). Not 100% sure, but if filesystems inside md can be updated via md if mounted with rw. OTOH, tmpfs itself act as a actual (but volatile) filesystem, mounted as tmpfs. And once in memory pressures, less actively used part of it is swapped, if swap partitions or swap files are cofigured (swap backed). And these differences can affect performance, depending on memory pressures. -- Tomoaki AOKI