Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: Current merrits of tmpfs with Jack

From: Russell Hanaghan <hanaghan@email-addr-hidden>
Date: Fri Jan 06 2006 - 18:24:38 EET

Russell Hanaghan wrote:

> Paul Davis wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2005-12-23 at 15:31 -0800, Kjetil S. Matheussen wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Lee Revell:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>> Jack then needs to be compiled as such right? That is,
>>>>>>>> specifically to
>>>>>>>> use /dev/shm as a tmpfs?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You know there's actually no good reason this has to be a
>>>>>>> compile time
>>>>>>> setting. It would be trivial to modify JACK to set this at
>>>>>>> runtime.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> how would a client know where to find the server sockets?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> By having a file called something like /tmp/jack_server_sockets_path
>>>>> containing info about where the server sockets are?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> $HOME/.jack_server_sockets_path?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, either $HOME/.jack_server_sockets_path_<hostname>
>>> or /tmp/jack_server_sockets_path_<username>
>>>
>>
>>
>> this looks to me like a 50% solution. it solves part of the problem
>> (allowing the location of the actual sockets/fifos to be determined at
>> runtime) by substituting another compile-time-only path instead. i see
>> the attraction, i am just not sure its the best solution.
>>
>> --p
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> So the first solution is the most solid; compile jack to utilize
> /dev/shm?
>
> Unless there is some trade off or sacrifice when doing so to either
> the systems stability and performance, or to jackits stability /
> performance, I don't see this as a major problem.
>
> thanks
> R~
>
So next silly question...

Is a tmpfs typically set up on /dev/shm on Linux systems? If not, where
does the config for this reside?

Thanks
R~
Received on Fri Jan 6 20:15:06 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Jan 06 2006 - 20:15:06 EET