On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 09:35:54AM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > > I thought etch now defaulted to tmpfs for /tmp meaning putting it in ram > where it is faster, and backed by swap if needed.
Isn't there a performance hit doing this? If a programme is putting stuff in /tmp to otherwise reduce its memory footprint, does it make sense to circumvent that and put /tmp back in memory? If a program is accessing both its /tmp file and another working file, with /tmp effectivly in swap, one has no controll over which spindle that page is on (assuming more than one disk) whereas if /tmp and /var/tmp are on a different spindle from the working directory they could be accessed at the same time. I wouldn't want to use /tmp for a temporary iso file. If I get the iso created and then have a power failure, I don't want it gone when rebooting cleans out /tmp. I thought that's what /var/tmp is for. Disk space is cheap. Other than saving space in /tmp when its not needed, is there an advantage to having it use tmpfs instead of a 'normal' device (partition, LV, whatever)? Thanks, Doug. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
