Re: Question: mount /var/run as tmpfs
Petter Reinholdtsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > mount point. For the others, edit /etc/default/rcS and set RAMRUN and > RAMLOCK to 'yes'. There are still some packages unable to cope with Hmm, is there any argument against making /etc/default/rcS a conffile or an ucf file to make sure - or at least increase the chance - that users get to know about new conf-items in there? regards Mario -- User sind wie ideale Gase - sie verteilen sich gleichmaessig ueber alle Platten -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Question: mount /var/run as tmpfs
[Aleksey Midenkov] > It is possible to detect if kernel supports tmpfs and mount it on > /var/run, /var/lock, /var/tmp and maybe /tmp and may be other > places. All of these except /var/tmp/ should be possible to mount as tmpfs. To list /tmp/ as tmpfs, just update /etc/fstab to list it as a tmpfs mount point. For the others, edit /etc/default/rcS and set RAMRUN and RAMLOCK to 'yes'. There are still some packages unable to cope with the non-persistent subdirectories in /var/run/ and /var/lock/, but luckily they are few. You will have to verify that this setup work for you. Having /var/run/ and /var/lock/ mounted as tmpfs has been possible for years, and is commonly done with stateless workstations and diskless machines. Having the same setting on servers is less tested, so you will find that some server packages fail to create the directories they need in /var/run/ and /var/lock/ during boot. If one of the packages you need fail to do this, please report the problem as a wishlist or normal severity bug. > This can be made in one of the appropriate debian packages and made > configurable through debconf. The package to fit this, I think, is > initscripts. The support for RAMRUN and RAMLOCK went into initscripts version 2.86.ds1-23, and is currently in sid. > How do you think, would it be appreciated? Does it potentionally > violates some policy for the particular directory from what I > mentioned? May be you will suggest some other directores. I want to > know because I want to do this. The FHS is a bit unclear about this, as some people read from it that directories in /var/run/ and /var/lock/ should persist across reboots, while others do not. The FHS should probably be made clearer on this point. This is not a new discussion, and I guess it will reappear later as well. It was discussed on debian-devel@ in august. You probably want to reread that discussion. Following that discussion, I went on to create /lib/init/rw/ as a mandatory tmpfs file system for storing state information very early in the boot. That was added in version 2.86.ds1-23 too. Friendly, -- Petter Reinholdtsen One of the initscripts maintainers -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Question: mount /var/run as tmpfs
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > also sprach Aleksey Midenkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.10.30.0902 +0100]: >> It is possible to detect if kernel supports tmpfs and mount it >> on /var/run, /var/lock, /var/tmp and maybe /tmp and may be other places. > > Definitely not /var/run, since its contents can survive reboots. > /var/run works fine though; I have not tried /var/tmp. /tmp might > end up consuming too much memory. There are two kinds of setupds. Those with a small tmp to hold the sockets and tiny temp files that gather there from day to day and those with large tmp where people put huge amounts of data. I think that if your tmp is less than half your ram size then tmpfs is a very good choice. After 60 days my tmp looks like this: tmpfs 1.0G 96K 1.0G 1% /tmp Definetly not consuming too much memory. Note that if the tmpfs does consume too much memory then linux swaps it out. So you should adjust the swap size accordingly. Personally I think even on low/medium ram sized systems (say 256MB+) tmpfs is a good choice. If ram is free then ram will be used. If not then swap is used. If tmpfs isn't full then more swap is free for programs. You get twice the use out of your swap as it can be used for either purpose. But do we need this in a package? Every admin can put a line into /etc/fstab for this if it is wanted. I think the right place to ask for this is the Debian-Installer. Leave installed systems as is. If people are used to having a 10G /tmp and you suddenly mount a 512MB tmpfs they won't like it. If you mount tmpfs at install time you will shaddow neccessary sockets (so don't). And if you only do it at the next reboot people might be surprised by the change half a year after they installed the package. As for the other directories: /var/run needs it dirs. /var/tmp must survive reboots. /var/run and /var/lock are too small to bother. I wouldn't want yet another two FS entries in my df and mount outputs. They are cluttered enough as it is. Recently /lib/init/rw added yet another line. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Question: mount /var/run as tmpfs
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello, Am Mo den 30. Okt 2006 um 9:02 schrieb Aleksey Midenkov: > It is possible to detect if kernel supports tmpfs and mount it > on /var/run, /var/lock, /var/tmp and maybe /tmp and may be other places. This Sounds interesting. Well, there is some problems with /var/tmp as /var/tmp has to survive reboot (That's the only sense for /var/tmp). But all other, especially /tmp and /var/run, would be very useful. On other distributions this still works. For Debian there might be the problem that the init-scripts do mostly not care about creating there subdirectory. Regards Klaus Ethgen - -- Klaus Ethgenhttp://www.ethgen.de/ pub 2048R/D1A4EDE5 2000-02-26 Klaus Ethgen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Fingerprint: D7 67 71 C4 99 A6 D4 FE EA 40 30 57 3C 88 26 2B -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iQEVAwUBRUXFyp+OKpjRpO3lAQJq6ggAnWdQlRLBCl1eWZG8/DRTT4v4LsfV82U1 6K+ofVKhUjEHHOdhxemU1QPvjADUw0UbxmiXcN3R4lyyMVzmYc4H5ckvSN+I7bz/ qgthUbxbAz72nD11YCtdPebNOqjnuTIZ806J8t+ZH1Mjt51mZNSNf6ylFY22jqr/ wVM7aszR3c1qgjhcweua7NPWnd+1ALwOaDiFlebPm1dqsB6QLrhFqsJvZMewiIq8 2r7PK4obRTuLiiMTA+Tdb/iFc42XZ3mYDHIb+8hd2TdknaGHkQPEMF59FNjUqrjp 76l7jmyU4sG+jXCDrBRSfs8J2ZqdJJ++MN/E5RaEkQuO2a7Umh904A== =2y74 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Question: mount /var/run as tmpfs
Le lundi 30 octobre 2006 à 09:41 +0100, martin f krafft a écrit : > also sprach Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.10.30.0933 +0100]: > > /var/run is problematic because its subdirectories are expected to > > survive across reboots. > > http://people.debian.org/~terpstra/message/20060917.012252.259a8f74.en.html > > I disagree, but anyway: this discussion has already taken place. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for putting it in a tmpfs if it turns out to be possible. -- Josselin Mouette/\./\ "Do you have any more insane proposals for me?"
Re: Question: mount /var/run as tmpfs
also sprach Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.10.30.0933 +0100]: > /var/run is problematic because its subdirectories are expected to > survive across reboots. http://people.debian.org/~terpstra/message/20060917.012252.259a8f74.en.html I disagree, but anyway: this discussion has already taken place. -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' : proud Debian developer, author, administrator, and user `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck - http://debiansystem.info `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems "twenty-four hour room-service must be one of the premiere achievements of modern civilization." -- special agent dale cooper signature.asc Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)
Re: Question: mount /var/run as tmpfs
Le lundi 30 octobre 2006 à 15:02 +0700, Aleksey Midenkov a écrit : > Hello all the Debian Community! > > It is possible to detect if kernel supports tmpfs and mount it > on /var/run, /var/lock, /var/tmp and maybe /tmp and may be other places. This > can be made in one of the appropriate debian packages and made configurable > through debconf. The package to fit this, I think, is initscripts. > > How do you think, would it be appreciated? Does it potentionally violates > some > policy for the particular directory from what I mentioned? May be you will > suggest some other directores. I want to know because I want to do this. /var/run is problematic because its subdirectories are expected to survive across reboots. I haven't tried /var/lock but there is no reason for tmpfs not to work for this one. Using a tmpfs for /var/tmp would definitely violate the FHS as it must survive across reboots. As for /tmp, this is the primary intended use for tmpfs and I use it whenever possible. I don't know if it's a good idea when there isn't much memory, though. -- Josselin Mouette/\./\ "Do you have any more insane proposals for me?"
Re: Question: mount /var/run as tmpfs
also sprach Aleksey Midenkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.10.30.0902 +0100]: > It is possible to detect if kernel supports tmpfs and mount it > on /var/run, /var/lock, /var/tmp and maybe /tmp and may be other places. Definitely not /var/run, since its contents can survive reboots. /var/run works fine though; I have not tried /var/tmp. /tmp might end up consuming too much memory. -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' : proud Debian developer, author, administrator, and user `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck - http://debiansystem.info `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems NP: Porcupine Tree / Recordings signature.asc Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)
Question: mount /var/run as tmpfs
Hello all the Debian Community! It is possible to detect if kernel supports tmpfs and mount it on /var/run, /var/lock, /var/tmp and maybe /tmp and may be other places. This can be made in one of the appropriate debian packages and made configurable through debconf. The package to fit this, I think, is initscripts. How do you think, would it be appreciated? Does it potentionally violates some policy for the particular directory from what I mentioned? May be you will suggest some other directores. I want to know because I want to do this. Thank you! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
