On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 12:50:43AM +0100, Digby Tarvin wrote: > On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 11:52:39AM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > > > Digby Tarvin wrote: > > > > I am thinking of using a tmpfs for /tmp, and would be interested > > > > to hear any thoughts that others have on this issue. > > > > On 28.04.06 20:41, Dennis Stosberg wrote: > > > I use tmpfs for /tmp on all of my machines and have so far not found > > > a good reason why I should not. > > > > I use this for ages, I was born at Solaris which mounts /tmp on tmpfs since > > early 90s, when Solaris 2 came out ;) without problems. I have even used > > small ramdisks with 2.2 kernels. > > I have now adopted it for my Linux systems, and was pleasantly surprised > with the functionality provided. The 'on demand' allocation makes it much > more efficent that a statically allocated partition where any space not > used for temp files is unavailable for anything else. That, coupled with > the ability to set an upper limit to reserve a minimum amount of space > for stop leads me to believe there is no real disadvantage. so , can you please detail how you have done this? tmpfs size, mounting details etc? I'm intrigued by this proposition and would like more info. thanks A
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature