From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 82543139694 for ; Wed, 24 May 2017 17:00:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 85F3321C259; Wed, 24 May 2017 17:00:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-io0-x242.google.com (mail-io0-x242.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::242]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3595D21C251 for ; Wed, 24 May 2017 17:00:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io0-x242.google.com with SMTP id m4so18744922ioe.0 for ; Wed, 24 May 2017 10:00:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=6+5CMvONuLZ+zwdqU6YpMV+rDwJbDK1HWJK4U9sLKNQ=; b=C2nC9DHeXxyuwLSiApMYbu1rTthER937dcttnA/vF1W3M4bRDmmgiR8rIJEmE8WI93 luNLl5ogsP4NqG/B0Ak4SnSGBAqdzMun+8RoZh0I3bs5dZGUVl3TFtgi43y83Bj30Cq4 GPFZCFvRy/pLWyhqenjlaaisrtJXOXeI3wPHFIGz86IO37M35OcMnH8uBhEmRYgOTvmf SqtRH7SIxIvhoOp5Amn+l4EyQvbXIoY87/y9WQqefMXSHCogMN63EmJtmTfC/cRuNJVX HyCrkOH75HCZjN/Y5r7zmqgmVl7zCLWUGquZWBxmsfQzRYRFlmpZqJ5jJ41DZIF5gynb zi9w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=6+5CMvONuLZ+zwdqU6YpMV+rDwJbDK1HWJK4U9sLKNQ=; b=nMMgOTuftqYjZ8mHzykV2/52F++/7QpR4sY7b1lgyPDB9LM3MdS/McMhYn/pVIxD56 +YwcseV5ikXwOhotuKgmuFPzhI62xu2vcZarlEInT3HuK+UTSmiIXisivpqpgtYjeVle NumyHL9yqbVau5FZnj73r8CVyTyLF6aqermuRgpUAgf0zBeOzgorKT0RkiakfeD4mgPe K4o2MJtFQ/KS3xTD+02SYX3X7z9Xw9ZugfkBi4XgxDcFh9RuNTGakO1D11E8huZcL8lj W/j3MW/6TJmtXaFYfUsowsan0/M1JynEN7Mny/raE5dPvV3fwkusKEvytWHgyfxKd+zp PZKg== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcALTNgwVZapO9TXq7kD1BSayPaqs6vUNze3dttS/qsDN1dCowUp H36bjifZu1ioKiHRTDYF3vp62O1rEtYO X-Received: by 10.107.57.198 with SMTP id g189mr32278638ioa.123.1495645232277; Wed, 24 May 2017 10:00:32 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.36.230.194 with HTTP; Wed, 24 May 2017 10:00:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20170524053434.GA2656@anonymous> References: <20170524051002.12325.12B52329@matica.foolinux.mooo.com> <20170524053434.GA2656@anonymous> From: R0b0t1 Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 12:00:31 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] tmp on tmpfs To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Archives-Salt: 99070a8d-4d63-499a-880d-ee2e628c61f2 X-Archives-Hash: bffd7fe7abd71a10ad133efad4575e11 On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 12:16 AM, Ian Zimmerman wrote: > So what are gentoo users' opinions on this matter of faith? > On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 12:34 AM, wrote: > Either way, it'd be nice if someone actually benchmarked this. > I don't have exhaustive benchmarks but moving PORTAGE_TMPDIR to a tmpfs makes builds at least an order of magnitude faster. For general usage with /tmp you may or may not notice, but the lack of normal IO overhead can only make it faster.