Re: Moving /tmp to tmpfs makes it useless
On Friday 25 May 2012 09:46:37 Vincent Danjean wrote:
> If some kind of sync is required by the application, I think this is
> because the application want to ensure the data are really written to
> the disk so that their state remains coherent even in case of crash.
> If the application is ok to have this kind of data written to
> tmpfs (ie in memory), I do not see the interest of using sync at
> first.
Agreed.
> Can someone shows me a valid use case of sync on tmpfs?
Unlikely. The last time I checked sync is a no-op on ramfs and tmpfs anyway
(shmem.c). Also, tmpfs would not write out to swap on sync.
Likewise, as there is no point of syncing anything if a on-disk filesystem is
mounted read-only, hence kernel does not even bother to (sync.c).
--
pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB <people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu>
Reply to: