From the title of your thread, I expected you should use a tmpfs (which is a ram file system backed by the swap partition).
But you have both a different request and a different definition of "disk-backed"
Quote:
Originally Posted by dchicks
improve the performance of my builds and daily working routines.
|
I think arranging for .o files and other intermediate files to be in a tmpfs rather than an ordinary file system would help a little.
But those are "disk-backed" in the overflow sense, not the security sense. So you wouldn't use it for anything that would be a disaster if lost during a system crash.
System crashes are rare. If you mean the same by "build" that I do, I don't think the loss of any current build products during a system crash is serious (even final build products, not just intermediate). After a system crash, I would restart any build from the beginning, not try to pick up where it left off.
Quote:
One thought that came to mind was to put all of my source into a RAM disk where it could build super-fast
|
I'm pretty sure that would not be worth all the trouble.
Quote:
Does anyone know of a way to set up a RAM disk that automatically saves writes of certain files back to the source hard disk?
|
I'm pretty sure that is a bad idea.
Quote:
I realize that the system cache does just this.
|
That is the most important reason the above idea is bad. The system cache combined with an ordinary disk file system is fundamentally more effective at accomplishing what you want to accomplish with a disk backed ram file system.
Quote:
Maybe there's a way to configure it more precisely
|
That would be nice. I'd like to know that too. I think the potential extra benefits are pretty limited. The generic behavior is pretty good. I'd like to have more detailed control because that is my personality and I know I could do a little better. But I think that extra control isn't available and isn't really needed.