2012/6/12 Bjørn Mork wrote: > I still think that the easy tmpfs resizing makes it superior for /tmp.
Why do people repeat that tmpfs is easy to resize? Yes, you need about 3 commands to resize tmpfs, but you need 0 (zero!) commands to resize /tmp on disk, because it's large by default and you don't need to resize it. It's easier to NOT resize /tmp on disk then resize /tmp on tmpfs, isn't it? ;) And there's more. You can't separate application data from your files on tmpfs in swap. But you can do that on a regular filesystem. You can dedicate /tmp directory to a separate partition/disk. Or you can balance it among several partitions (see `mhddfs`). You can't do that with tmpfs. > we might need a daemon monitoring /tmp and doing ondemand resizing. Since tmpfs+swap is mostly slower than regular filesystem and may generate more writes... I can't think of any cases where such daemon would be better than a usual /tmp on disk. But if you need it somewhy... check swapd. PS: I'm curious can swap-files break suspend-to-disk even for users having a separate swap partition? -- Serge -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caovenepqrpbawuscncvvnd_dumd5te4hbtp4tpn-r-e4mb3...@mail.gmail.com
