lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Reg <register9...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: use MMapDirectory with tmpfs?
Date Tue, 22 Oct 2013 07:28:14 GMT
Excellent!  Thanks for the answer.  In fact we did have to choose between
tmpfs and ramfs, and now I know which one is better for certain.


On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 12:21 AM, Uwe Schindler <uwe@thetaphi.de> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> E.g., the Linux kernel implementation of tmpfs (inspired by Solaris) is to
> work solely on virtual memory - RTFM:
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/filesystems/tmpfs.txt
> This is the main difference between a stupid old ramfs (aka RAM disk) and
> tmpfs.
>
> Uwe
>
> -----
> Uwe Schindler
> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
> http://www.thetaphi.de
> eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Reg [mailto:register9527@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 8:27 AM
> > To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> > Subject: use MMapDirectory with tmpfs?
> >
> > Hi there,
> >
> > If I put Lucene segments on tmpfs and use MMapDirectory to access them,
> > would the kernel be so dumb to load the files from tmpfs to another copy
> of
> > file system cache before map it to the virtual address?  Or it just maps
> tmpfs
> > to the virtual address directly?  I tend to believe it's the later but
> want to
> > confirm with the experts.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message