Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2013 13:59:53 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lo=EFc?= BLOT <loic.blot@unix-experience.fr> To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: /tmp: change default to mdmfs and/or tmpfs? Message-ID: <1370779193.2018.10.camel@Nerz-PC> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1306091538490.48048@woozle.rinet.ru> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1306091538490.48048@woozle.rinet.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] Hello Dmitry, I agree with you. /tmp is a temporary filesystem. On machines (both servers and clients), i think /tmp must be like Linux, cleared at reboot because it's a temporary FS. The Linux point i don't agree is size of /tmp (on Linux: ram-memory/2). This formula is quite good for system with lower than 2Gb of RAM but i think 2Go is sufficient to system with more RAM (we could control this a install of in the fstab after ?). -- Best regards, Loïc BLOT, UNIX systems, security and network expert http://www.unix-experience.fr Le dimanche 09 juin 2013 à 15:45 +0400, Dmitry Morozovsky a écrit : > Dear colleagues, > > what do you think about stop using precious disk or even SSD resources for > /tmp? > > For last several (well, maybe over 10?) years I constantly use md (swap-backed) > for /tmp, usually 128M in size, which is enough for most of our server needs. > Some require more, but none more than 512M. Regarding the options, we use > tmpmfs_flags="-S -n -o async -b 4096 -f 512" > > Given more and more fixes/improvements committed to tmpfs, switching /tmp to it > would be even better idea. > > You thoughts? Thank you! > > [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iF4EABEIAAYFAlG0bjkACgkQh290DZyz8uaPGQEApIRm/z1EYj4jJvdWHGnn2X+j hLQTsdMMktHhYm2t0e8BANHRRbEGr1coZpLYnCJnzIS7YkFOLHhMvsMoSYVqlDlZ =Esvp -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1370779193.2018.10.camel>