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

[Lee Revell]

On Fri, 2005-12-23 at 19:46 -0800, 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.

Obviously, make sure /dev/shm exists and is a tmpfs mount first but yes,
there's no trade off at all.

Lee