[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  Kris Maglione <bsdaemon at comcast dot net>
 To:  m0n0wall-dev Mailing List <m0n0wall dash dev at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall-dev] Re: The future
 Date:  Thu, 13 Oct 2005 18:09:01 -0400
On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 01:06:46AM -0400, Chris Buechler wrote:
>While CF size is probably not an issue for the majority of
>installations, if you bump the image size to, say, 16 MB, you're going
>to start seeing issues on systems with 64 MB RAM on upgrades at a
>minimum.  m0n0wall runs from RAM, so that's an extra 8 MB of RAM use,
>and then when you upgrade another 16 MB free space needed to hold the
>new image.
I mentioned this in an earlier thread, but it should be possible to eliminate 
the need to run from memory in all but net boot situations. Either a 
file-backed root can be mounted, with the sections that need to be writeable 
mounted from a memory-backed fs, of the whole filesystem can be overlayed with 
a memory-backed union mount. Either way, only the things that changed would 
require ram. As far as performance degredation goes, FreeBSD has excellent 
filesystem cacheing. Unless a system is pressed for RAM, most of the 
filesystem would wind up resident in the RAM cache anyway.

Kris Maglione

Real programmers never work 9 to 5.  If any real
programmers are around at 9 a.m., it's because they
were up all night.