Re: Moving /tmp to tmpfs is fine
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 08:14:10PM +0300, Serge wrote:
> 2012/5/25 Neil Williams wrote:
> > Different hardware -> different software selection.
> I don't understand your point. I could understand it if we were choosing
> among benefits that most users get from /tmp being on disk and /tmp being
> on tmpfs. But there're NO benefits in having /tmp on tmpfs. It works (not
> works better, just works somehow) only on systems with a lot of RAM.
This is plain wrong. NO benefits for tmpfs? "just works somehow"?
Whatever other arguments you had, the statement above tells me you only
look at _your_ use case and dismiss all others, or that you don't
understand the different behaviours of fsync() (with enough memory, that
is) on tmpfs, HDDs and SSDs.
And no, "I really can't think of any popular application" is not a valid
iustin, happily using /tmp on tmpfs since many, many years ago, and
configuring it as such on all Debian machines he installs (of various