Mounting mqueue.in as a tempfs...on FreeBSD

[Peter Bonivart]

Michael Baird wrote:
> So yes, if this person mounts mqueue.in as a tmpfs as was his question,
> and the machine crashes, mqueue.in is lost, referring to my own
> experience using tmpfs and the FAQ referenced by the link
> http://www.sng.ecs.soton.ac.uk/cgi-bin/faq?_highlightWords=tmpfs&file=120,
> Specifically the Julian Field post, where he post "With tmpfs-based
> directories for mqueue.in mqueue MailScanner/incoming this increases to
> about 1.5 million messages per day, using the same settings. This is not
> safe as the mqueue.in and.mqueue would be lost on power-outs. So if you
> have the RAM to throw at it, and plenty of CPU horse-power to make use
> of it, you can increase your message throughput by roughly 30% by moving
> the MailScanner/incoming directory onto a tmpfs filesystem held in RAM"
>
> If you know of a different FAQ that says otherwise please let me know,
> or if you have some magic way of having tmpfs survive a reboot (like an
> Amiga RAD disk), please point me to it, and I will stand corrected.

I'm not into magic but I do read the posts in the thread I'm replying
to, that usually works too. I pointed it out to him that he can't
(shouldn't) use tmpfs on mqueue.in and he replied that he meant
MailScanners incoming directory. You were off in your last post and
you're still off. Sorry. :-)

--
/Peter Bonivart

--Unix lovers do it in the Sun

Sun Fire V210, Solaris 9, Sendmail 8.12.10, MailScanner 4.25-14,
SpamAssassin 2.63 + DCC 1.2.30, ClamAV 0.67 + GMP 4.1.2, MailStats 0.25