Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Michael Mol wrote: > On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 9:52 AM, Dale > wrote: > > Michael Mol wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Dale > > wrote: >> >> Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: >> > The 07/09/12, Dale wrote: >>

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 9:52 AM, Dale wrote: > Michael Mol wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Dale wrote: > >> Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: >> > The 07/09/12, Dale wrote: >> > >> >> The thing is tho, whether it is using the memory as cache or using it >> >> as >> >> tmpfs, it is the same m

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Michael Mol wrote: > On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Dale > wrote: > > Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: > > The 07/09/12, Dale wrote: > > > >> The thing is tho, whether it is using the memory as cache or > using it > >> as > >> tmpfs, it is the same

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Dale wrote: > Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: > > The 07/09/12, Dale wrote: > > > >> The thing is tho, whether it is using the memory as cache or using it > >> as > >> tmpfs, it is the same memory. There is no difference. That's the > >> whole > >> point. > > Feel free

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: > The 07/09/12, Dale wrote: > >> The thing is tho, whether it is using the memory as cache or using it >> as >> tmpfs, it is the same memory. There is no difference. That's the >> whole >> point. > Feel free to take your own assumptions as undeniable truth. The way the >

[gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

The 07/09/12, Dale wrote: > The thing is tho, whether it is using the memory as cache or using it > as > tmpfs, it is the same memory. There is no difference. That's the > whole > point. Feel free to take your own assumptions as undeniable truth. The way the kernel work with memory is the key,

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 07:25:42 -0500, Dale wrote: > Since when you run emerge it loads everything into ram, > regardless of whether portages work directory is on tmpfs or not, it > doesn't matter. This test is NOT about portage loading things into ram > WHILE emerging, it was about having the work

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: > The 06/09/12, Dale wrote: > >> But whether it is on tmpfs or just regular memory doesn't matter. Once >> emerge starts, everything is in ram including portages work directory >> which would be on tmpfs here. That's why it doesn't matter if portage >> is on tmpfs or not.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: > The 06/09/12, Dale wrote: > >> But this is what you guys are missing too. If you want to use tmpfs, >> you have to have enough ram to begin with. Whether you use tmpfs or >> not, you have to have enough ram to do the compile otherwise you start >> using swap or it just c

[gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

The 07/09/12, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: > > There is another flaw in your assumption above. I already had the > > tarballs downloaded BEFORE even the first emerge. > > This is not a flaw in assumption. This is negligible. Fixing myself: s/negligible/out of the scope/ -- Nicolas Sebrecht

[gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

The 06/09/12, Dale wrote: > But this is what you guys are missing too. If you want to use tmpfs, > you have to have enough ram to begin with. Whether you use tmpfs or > not, you have to have enough ram to do the compile otherwise you start > using swap or it just crashes. Having ram is a prereq

[gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

The 06/09/12, Dale wrote: > But whether it is on tmpfs or just regular memory doesn't matter. Once > emerge starts, everything is in ram including portages work directory > which would be on tmpfs here. That's why it doesn't matter if portage > is on tmpfs or not. Once emerge loads up the files

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 16:09:12 -0500, Dale wrote: > >>> Reading the tarball has nothing to do with this, we are discussing >>> filesystems for PORTAGE_TMPDIR, not DISTDIR. It's where the source is >>> unpacked, the object files compiled to, the executables linked to and >>> the

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 16:09:12 -0500, Dale wrote: > > Reading the tarball has nothing to do with this, we are discussing > > filesystems for PORTAGE_TMPDIR, not DISTDIR. It's where the source is > > unpacked, the object files compiled to, the executables linked to and > > the install image created t

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 11:44:07 -0500, Dale wrote: > >> I kind of get what they are saying but at the same time using tmpfs >> doesn't matter. Once the tarball is read off the drive, it doesn't >> matter whether portage is run on a tmpfs or not. > Reading the tarball has nothin

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 11:32:41 -0500, Dale wrote: > Others ran their own tests and got the same results. No one is denying the results, only the reasons given for them. -- Neil Bothwick If you can't be kind, be vague. signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 11:44:07 -0500, Dale wrote: > I kind of get what they are saying but at the same time using tmpfs > doesn't matter. Once the tarball is read off the drive, it doesn't > matter whether portage is run on a tmpfs or not. Reading the tarball has nothing to do with this, we are di

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: > The 06/09/12, Dale wrote: > >> Then take a look at it this way. If I emerge seamonkey with portage's >> work directory on disk and it takes 12 minutes, the first time. Then I >> clear the caches and emerge seamonkey again while portage's work >> directory is on tmpfs and

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Paul Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Dale wrote: >> OK. Step by step here so hopefully you and Neil can follow. >> >> Freshly booted system. >> Clear caches just to be sure >> >> emerge foo with portages work directory on tmpfs >> clear caches again >> emerge foo with portages wo

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Michael Mol wrote: > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Dale wrote: >> Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: >>> The 06/09/12, Dale wrote: >>> Not quite. The theory is that if you put portages work directory on tmpfs, then all the writes and such are done in ram which is faster. >>> No! This is too muc

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 09:07:30 -0500, Dale wrote: > >> I don't care if emerge uses cache >> DURING the emerge process because it is always enabled in both tests. >> The point is whether portage's work directory is on tmpfs or not makes >> emerges faster. > It does not, if you

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Michael Mol wrote: > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Dale wrote: >> Neil Bothwick wrote: >>> On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 07:48:59 -0500, Dale wrote: >>> I don't think that is correct. I am clearing the files in ram. That's the point of drop_caches is to clear the kernels cache files. See pos

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Dale wrote: > OK. Step by step here so hopefully you and Neil can follow. > > Freshly booted system. > Clear caches just to be sure > > emerge foo with portages work directory on tmpfs > clear caches again > emerge foo with portages work directory on disk > clear c

[gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

The 06/09/12, Dale wrote: > Then take a look at it this way. If I emerge seamonkey with portage's > work directory on disk and it takes 12 minutes, the first time. Then I > clear the caches and emerge seamonkey again while portage's work > directory is on tmpfs and it is 12 minutes. Then repeat

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 09:07:30 -0500, Dale wrote: > I don't care if emerge uses cache > DURING the emerge process because it is always enabled in both tests. > The point is whether portage's work directory is on tmpfs or not makes > emerges faster. It does not, if you have enough RAM, precisely be

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Dale wrote: > Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: >> The 06/09/12, Dale wrote: >> >>> Not quite. The theory is that if you put portages work directory on >>> tmpfs, then all the writes and such are done in ram which is faster. >> No! This is too much simplistic view to explai

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: > The 06/09/12, Dale wrote: > >> I do get it. I CLEARED #1 and #2, there is no usage of #3 and #4 is not >> large enough here to matter. So, it is left with #5. >> >> See the point? The test was a NORMAL emerge with portages work >> directory on tmpfs and a NORMAL emerge

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Dale wrote: > Neil Bothwick wrote: >> On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 07:48:59 -0500, Dale wrote: >> >>> I don't think that is correct. I am clearing the files in ram. That's >>> the point of drop_caches is to clear the kernels cache files. See post >>> to Nicolas Sebrecht

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: > The 06/09/12, Dale wrote: > >> Not quite. The theory is that if you put portages work directory on >> tmpfs, then all the writes and such are done in ram which is faster. > No! This is too much simplistic view to explain what you see. > > In practice, _all_ the writes alw

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 07:48:59 -0500, Dale wrote: > >> I don't think that is correct. I am clearing the files in ram. That's >> the point of drop_caches is to clear the kernels cache files. See post >> to Nicolas Sebrecht a bit ago. > Take a step back Dale and read the post

[gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

The 06/09/12, Dale wrote: > Not quite. The theory is that if you put portages work directory on > tmpfs, then all the writes and such are done in ram which is faster. No! This is too much simplistic view to explain what you see. In practice, _all_ the writes always happen in RAM whatever backen

[gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

The 06/09/12, Dale wrote: > I do get it. I CLEARED #1 and #2, there is no usage of #3 and #4 is not > large enough here to matter. So, it is left with #5. > > See the point? The test was a NORMAL emerge with portages work > directory on tmpfs and a NORMAL emerge with portages work directory o

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 07:48:59 -0500, Dale wrote: > I don't think that is correct. I am clearing the files in ram. That's > the point of drop_caches is to clear the kernels cache files. See post > to Nicolas Sebrecht a bit ago. Take a step back Dale and read the posts again. This is not about t

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 06:31:24 -0500, Dale wrote: > >> Not quite. The theory is that if you put portages work directory on >> tmpfs, then all the writes and such are done in ram which is faster. If >> you have portages work directory on disk, it will be slower because the >>

[gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

The 06/09/12, Neil Bothwick wrote: > The only real benefit of using tmpfs is the one you mentioned elsewhere, > that the disks don't get bothered at all. Benefits also depends of what the system does during the emerge. If another process is intensively using the kernel cache and the kernel cache

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: > The 06/09/12, Dale wrote: > >> The point you are missing is this. Between those tests, I CLEARED that >> cache. The thing you and Neil claim that makes a difference does not >> exist after you clear the cache. I CLEARED that cache between EACH and >> every test that was

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 06:31:24 -0500, Dale wrote: > Not quite. The theory is that if you put portages work directory on > tmpfs, then all the writes and such are done in ram which is faster. If > you have portages work directory on disk, it will be slower because the > disk is slower. But the dis

[gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

The 06/09/12, Dale wrote: > The point you are missing is this. Between those tests, I CLEARED that > cache. The thing you and Neil claim that makes a difference does not > exist after you clear the cache. I CLEARED that cache between EACH and > every test that was ran whether using tmpfs or not

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: > The 06/09/12, Dale wrote: > >> The point was >> whether having portages work directory on tmpfs resulted in speed >> increases. If you have portages work directory on tmpfs, of course it >> uses ram. That's what tmpfs

[gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

The 06/09/12, Dale wrote: > The point was > whether having portages work directory on tmpfs resulted in speed > increases. If you have portages work directory on tmpfs, of course it > uses ram. That's what tmpfs is. It's taking what might no

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: > The 06/09/12, Dale wrote: > >> Then explain to me why it was at times slower while on tmpfs? Trust me, >> I ran this test many times and in different orders and it did NOT make >> much if any difference. > As explained, this is expected if you have enough RAM. > > I didn

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 05:03:55 -0500, Dale wrote: > You miss this point not me. I *cleared* that cache. From kernel.org: >>> Sorry Dale, but you are missing the point. You cleared the cache >>> before running emerge, then ran emerge. The first thing emerge did >>>

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 05:11:01 -0500, Dale wrote: > >> You need to run free, run the command to clear and then run free again >> so you can see for yourself. If it was just me, I could think I am >> wrong but this was tested by others too with the same results. > I'm not sayin

[gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

The 06/09/12, Dale wrote: > Then explain to me why it was at times slower while on tmpfs? Trust me, > I ran this test many times and in different orders and it did NOT make > much if any difference. As explained, this is expected if you have enough RAM. I didn't check but I would expect that f

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 05:11:01 -0500, Dale wrote: > You need to run free, run the command to clear and then run free again > so you can see for yourself. If it was just me, I could think I am > wrong but this was tested by others too with the same results. I'm not saying your test results are wron

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 05:03:55 -0500, Dale wrote: > >> You miss this point not me. I *cleared* that cache. From > >> kernel.org: > > Sorry Dale, but you are missing the point. You cleared the cache > > before running emerge, then ran emerge. The first thing emerge did > > was unpack the tarball

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 04:15:23 -0500, Dale wrote: > >>> You missed the point. One of the first thing emerge will do is to >>> uncompress the package. At this time, all the files are cached in RAM. >>> Hence, everything needed for the build/compilation will come from the >>> cac

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 04:15:23 -0500, Dale wrote: > >>> You missed the point. One of the first thing emerge will do is to >>> uncompress the package. At this time, all the files are cached in RAM. >>> Hence, everything needed for the build/compilation will come from the >>> cac

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 04:15:23 -0500, Dale wrote: > > You missed the point. One of the first thing emerge will do is to > > uncompress the package. At this time, all the files are cached in RAM. > > Hence, everything needed for the build/compilation will come from the > > cache like it would do with

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: > The 05/09/12, Dale wrote: >> Michael Mol wrote: >>> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote: On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 07:52:45 -0500, Dale wrote: >>> I might also add, I see no speed improvements in putting portages >>> work directory on tmpfs.

[gentoo-user] Re: aligning SSD partitions

The 05/09/12, Dale wrote: > Michael Mol wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote: > >> On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 07:52:45 -0500, Dale wrote: > >> > > I might also add, I see no speed improvements in putting portages > > work directory on tmpfs. I have tested this a few ti