Re: TMPDIR - Do we also need a drive backed TPMDIR ?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Thu, 2016-07-21 at 13:15 +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> > Now, back to the actual problem. For many applications, we rely on
> > the TMPDIR environments. Tools like Python's modules help use these
> > variables and not worry about the underneath platform.
> > Under Linux, with /tmp more commonly on tmpfs, how are developers
> > dealing with it? tmpfs is limited and multi gigabyte operations may
> > end up filling it all (as is the case in the debdelta bug report
> > above).
> As a drive backend, why doesn't swap work for this? There's no mention of swap
> in the original bug report.
Swap will come into effect when the kernel needs more memory.
As I understand it, TMPDIR on tmpfs is capped, based on the amount of real RAM
the machine has. And any application's view of TMPDIR is based on that capped
- From the tmpfs(5) manpage, which seems to be Debian specific, it mentions that
50% of RAM will be used, by default.
On the machine where the (debdelta) bug is seen, I have enough RAM.
rrs@chutzpah:~/Community/Packaging$ free -m
total used free shared buff/cache available
Mem: 7387 1403 4727 37 1256 5677
Swap: 8579 0 8579
And the documented defaults for tmpfs reflect below.
rrs@chutzpah:~/Community/Packaging$ df -h /tmp/
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
tmpfs 3.7G 0 3.7G 0% /tmp
Ritesh Raj Sarraf | http://people.debian.org/~rrs
Debian - The Universal Operating System
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----