linux-kernel - Re: What is the limit size of tmpfs /dev/shm ?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0802062150440.16791@blonde.site>
Date:	Wed, 6 Feb 2008 21:58:24 +0000 (GMT)
From:	Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
cc:	Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo@...g.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Mika Lawando <rzryyvzy@...shmail.net>
Subject: Re: What is the limit size of tmpfs /dev/shm ?

On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> 
> That sounds like a problem in our overall swap handling, not specifically in
> tmpfs.  Now, I can't say anything concrete about heavy swap conditions, but in
> light swap conditions I have measured a 20x performance improvement(!) over
> ext3 on real workloads.

Wow, I'm surprised.  I suppose I do jump to thinking of heavy swapping
when light swapping won't be so bad; but even so, 20x ext3 astonishes
me - ext3 wouldn't be anyone's choice for fastest, but even so...

I certainly guess too much and measure too little:
is there a useful test you could point me to?  TIA

Hugh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/