If I have a RAM Disk, for what do I need system RAM
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
-3
down vote
favorite
I was wondering, if I have a RAM Disk and put my whole OS onto that RAM disk, then I guess there is no use for the system RAM anymore, since fetching it from there is not faster than fetching it from the system drive.
But in all tutorials I found, I always just allocate a fraction of my RAM for a RAM disk and not everything I have and then use the RAM disk as it were a normal hard drive. So my question, is there a way to not have any sytem memory at all and just work directly from the RAM disk?
ram ramdisk
asked Oct 16 '17 at 17:50
user255886
1
add a comment |Â
up vote
-3
down vote
favorite
I was wondering, if I have a RAM Disk and put my whole OS onto that RAM disk, then I guess there is no use for the system RAM anymore, since fetching it from there is not faster than fetching it from the system drive.
But in all tutorials I found, I always just allocate a fraction of my RAM for a RAM disk and not everything I have and then use the RAM disk as it were a normal hard drive. So my question, is there a way to not have any sytem memory at all and just work directly from the RAM disk?
ram ramdisk
asked Oct 16 '17 at 17:50
user255886
1
disk would be (nonpersistant) storage. still need working ram to actually run and do stuff.
– ivanivan
Oct 16 '17 at 18:07
add a comment |Â
up vote
-3
down vote
favorite
up vote
-3
down vote
favorite
I was wondering, if I have a RAM Disk and put my whole OS onto that RAM disk, then I guess there is no use for the system RAM anymore, since fetching it from there is not faster than fetching it from the system drive.
But in all tutorials I found, I always just allocate a fraction of my RAM for a RAM disk and not everything I have and then use the RAM disk as it were a normal hard drive. So my question, is there a way to not have any sytem memory at all and just work directly from the RAM disk?
ram ramdisk
asked Oct 16 '17 at 17:50
user255886
1
I was wondering, if I have a RAM Disk and put my whole OS onto that RAM disk, then I guess there is no use for the system RAM anymore, since fetching it from there is not faster than fetching it from the system drive.
But in all tutorials I found, I always just allocate a fraction of my RAM for a RAM disk and not everything I have and then use the RAM disk as it were a normal hard drive. So my question, is there a way to not have any sytem memory at all and just work directly from the RAM disk?
ram ramdisk
asked Oct 16 '17 at 17:50
user255886
1
asked Oct 16 '17 at 17:50
user255886
1
asked Oct 16 '17 at 17:50
user255886
1
asked Oct 16 '17 at 17:50
user255886
1
1
disk would be (nonpersistant) storage. still need working ram to actually run and do stuff.
– ivanivan
Oct 16 '17 at 18:07
add a comment |Â
disk would be (nonpersistant) storage. still need working ram to actually run and do stuff.
– ivanivan
Oct 16 '17 at 18:07
disk would be (nonpersistant) storage. still need working ram to actually run and do stuff.
– ivanivan
Oct 16 '17 at 18:07
disk would be (nonpersistant) storage. still need working ram to actually run and do stuff.
– ivanivan
Oct 16 '17 at 18:07
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
There are a couple of reasons: 1) the OS has to allocate memory for various data structures: it does that by using RAM, not a RAM disk; 2) access to a RAM disk goes through (at least) the block layer of the OS (which - see point 1 - has to have its data structures allocated in RAM), which makes RAM disk access slower than RAM access.
The OS could bootstrap itself as it does today until a RAM disk is set up and then migrate all allocations to the RAM disk, but there is not much point in that: it complicates the OS and it makes things slower.
answered Oct 16 '17 at 18:07
NickD
1,5921312
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
There are a couple of reasons: 1) the OS has to allocate memory for various data structures: it does that by using RAM, not a RAM disk; 2) access to a RAM disk goes through (at least) the block layer of the OS (which - see point 1 - has to have its data structures allocated in RAM), which makes RAM disk access slower than RAM access.
The OS could bootstrap itself as it does today until a RAM disk is set up and then migrate all allocations to the RAM disk, but there is not much point in that: it complicates the OS and it makes things slower.
answered Oct 16 '17 at 18:07
NickD
1,5921312
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
There are a couple of reasons: 1) the OS has to allocate memory for various data structures: it does that by using RAM, not a RAM disk; 2) access to a RAM disk goes through (at least) the block layer of the OS (which - see point 1 - has to have its data structures allocated in RAM), which makes RAM disk access slower than RAM access.
The OS could bootstrap itself as it does today until a RAM disk is set up and then migrate all allocations to the RAM disk, but there is not much point in that: it complicates the OS and it makes things slower.
answered Oct 16 '17 at 18:07
NickD
1,5921312
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
There are a couple of reasons: 1) the OS has to allocate memory for various data structures: it does that by using RAM, not a RAM disk; 2) access to a RAM disk goes through (at least) the block layer of the OS (which - see point 1 - has to have its data structures allocated in RAM), which makes RAM disk access slower than RAM access.
The OS could bootstrap itself as it does today until a RAM disk is set up and then migrate all allocations to the RAM disk, but there is not much point in that: it complicates the OS and it makes things slower.
answered Oct 16 '17 at 18:07
NickD
1,5921312
There are a couple of reasons: 1) the OS has to allocate memory for various data structures: it does that by using RAM, not a RAM disk; 2) access to a RAM disk goes through (at least) the block layer of the OS (which - see point 1 - has to have its data structures allocated in RAM), which makes RAM disk access slower than RAM access.
The OS could bootstrap itself as it does today until a RAM disk is set up and then migrate all allocations to the RAM disk, but there is not much point in that: it complicates the OS and it makes things slower.
answered Oct 16 '17 at 18:07
NickD
1,5921312
answered Oct 16 '17 at 18:07
NickD
1,5921312
answered Oct 16 '17 at 18:07
NickD
1,5921312
answered Oct 16 '17 at 18:07
NickD
1,5921312
1,5921312
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f398465%2fif-i-have-a-ram-disk-for-what-do-i-need-system-ram%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
disk would be (nonpersistant) storage. still need working ram to actually run and do stuff.
– ivanivan
Oct 16 '17 at 18:07