Tuesday 30 September 2003 08.23 skrev Rocco: > >> I am trying to setup my new laptop to be a very friendly > >> > >> environment for multimedia editing and software > > > > Currently I use: > > tmpfs for /tmp > > > > The /tmp setting makes much more of a difference than anything else > > though... > > I would really recommend that people use tmpfs for /tmp (mounts /tmp in > ram). I googled "tmpfs" and there were some very good articles out there. > > I've been meaning to pose this question for a while, so maybe this is a > good time to do it. Am I the only one out there that has their "Record > Directory" mounted as a tmpfs? I went out and bought a half a gig of ram > and brought my ram up to over 700 Megs of Ram. Now I just move all my > audio files into the "Record Directory" (in other words, in Ram) and > record out of that. Of course, I periodically copy the newly recorded > file to the hard drive. > > The only thing is... I can't vouch for this approach because I havn't > had more than 2 (sterio 48000) wavs playing and 1 sterio 48000 wav being > recorded to at the same time. But there hasn't been so much as one > hiccup. But I guess the reason I haven't mentioned about this approach > is because I've (many times before) thought I stumbled on to something > great, only to find out that it wasn't as good as it looked on the > outside. But I have the feeling I'm going to keep getting good > performance from this meathod. And with the price of Ram these days, > it's an affordable approach. Yeah, if you got the ram this should be pretty good. I'm wondering about the size of the partition though. I've heard that tmpfs is dynamically resized. With this kind of approach, wouldn't it be a good idea if it was possible to set the partition to a specific size? This to avoid putting to much in the partition and causing the machine to start swapping. Or is it already possible to specify a size for tmpfs partitions? /Robert
