[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Moving /tmp to tmpfs makes it useless

On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 02:48:26PM +0200, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> writes:
> > On 2012-05-30 12:08:29 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> >> Le samedi 26 mai 2012 à 23:02 +0200, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez a
> >> écrit : 
> >> > With "tmpfs on /tmp" you are breaking many applications that assume that
> >> > they have enough space to write on /tmp like the flash player ( see
> >> > Debian bug #666096 ) or cdrecord software ( see #665634 ).

> >> Seriously, this is madness. You can’t expect to have “enough” space on
> >> *any* filesystem.

> > I think that the point is that in general, there is more space on
> > the local disk than on some tmpfs. What I mean is that if /tmp is
> > on the right partition on the disk, it will have more space than
> > any reasonable tmpfs.

> Does that make any difference at all?  If an application is unable to
> handle the out-of-space condition, then it will be unable to handle the
> out-of-space condition no matter how big the file system is.  Increasing
> the file system size is futile.  Fix the bug in the application instead.

The problem is not whether applications gracefully handle ENOSPC.  The
problem is whether we as a distribution are causing users to hit ENOSPC when
there's no justifiable reason for it.

Even if every application on the system handles ENOSPC gracefully, it's
*still* a bug if I have 100GB free on my disk and am hitting ENOSPC due to
decisions that Debian, and not me, has made regarding filesystem layout.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: