When a system does not boot as quickly as expected, people sometimes revert to using a populated ram disk. The idea is that a ram disk resides in RAM, and hence is faster than a flash file system (which is correct). However, in the end no performance gain occurs. This page described why this happens and why in general a ram disk is not a good idea.
How ram disks are used
The standard way to use a populated ram disk is to make a ram disk image, load it to memory using the boot loader (e.g. using a grub initrd line in menu.lst) and tell the kernel to use the ram disk (by means of the initrd= and root=/dev/ram0 kernel parameter).
Why is there no performance gain?
This is simple. The ramdisk need to be loaded from flash memory. This takes time. After that there is indeed a speedup because you do not need to access the flash any more. However, the gain from this speedup hardly ever recoups the time needed to load the flash disk in the first place.
Reason for this is that if there is no ram disk only those parts of an executable that are really needed are read from the background memory. Unit of transfer is a page (typically 4K or 8K). So if you were using only a few functions from e.g. glibc only those pages are loaded, not the full glibc (which might be around 1MB).
However in case of a ram disk, the whole glibc needs to be loaded. It is easy to see that loading a whole file (as done in the ram disk case) takes more time than reading the pages that you need (as is the case in the non ramk disk case).
Now you might reason that pages might be read multiple times, which contribues to the gain. Technically you are right. Rereading the same page several times will cause some saving (although it still can be argued if this is enough to recover the ram disk load time). However lets look a little bit deeper:
If a page is reread it has been dropped from the buffer cache. This means that the kernel is running out of buffer space. If that is the problem then a ram disk is not going to be the solution! Better use no ram disk and give that memory to the kernel, who will most likely be able to use it in a more efficient manner.
But is there no situation when a ram disk will give a gain?
Of course there are. I can think of the following situations:
- If most or all pages of your ram disk are used, especially if your boot loader is faster reading the ram disk than the kernel is (this could be related to compression and/or to less read overhead).
- If the source of the ram disk might disappear (e.g. if the ram file system resides on the network or on a removable disk that may be removed).
- If execution start time is more important than boot time (then it helps if glibc and friends are in RAM). (this might also be the case if your ramfs is e.g. read over the network).
But what about initramfs?
initramfs has the same inherent problems. It does a little bit better job because it copies the data to the buffer cache. After that the memory occupied by the initramfs image is released. However, still it reads more than needed.
So ram disks are useless?
No, not at all. Having populated ram disk and use them as root filesystem is often not very meaningful. However a ram disk or ramfs device which is used to store temporary data can be very useful. It is a lot faster to write a 1MB temp file to RAM than it is to write it to flash.