Hello Phillip, Phillip Susi [2012-01-13 15:39 -0500]: > Bug #18661 has been requesting that /tmp be mounted as a tmpfs since > 2005. Either this should finally be done, or marked as wontfix. I > would like the TB to decide if this should be done or not. If not, > please mark the bug as wontfix with the rationale, if yes, then it > should be as simple as changing the default fstab file in the mountall > package from fs type none to tmpfs for /tmp.
Now that precise is out of the door, I think we should revisit this question. A tmpfs /tmp/ is much more efficient for the bulk of stuff that goes to /tmp than a real hard disk file system, as it avoids disk wakeups, unnecessary IO, etc. The regression potential with that change is that there are programs which assume that they have plenty of space in /tmp; e. g. Firefox downloads things there, unless you use "Save as..". There might also be CD burning programs, video encoders etc. which try to place huge files there. So we need to identify those and fix them to put large stuff into /var/tmp/ instead. In practice it doesn't seem to be so bad, though. I've been running with a tmpfs /tmp for quite some months now without problems, but then again my computer usage habits are fairly regular and presumably much different from the average user (e. g. I don't do video editing or CD/DVD burning at all). I think early quantal would be a great time to enable this, so that we have some time to identify problematic programs. I heard that Fedora plans to enable this as well, so there's some potential for collaboration and sharing results, too. What do others think? Thanks, Martin -- Martin Pitt | http://www.piware.de Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Developer (www.debian.org)
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- technical-board mailing list technical-board@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/technical-board
