From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Jun  9 12:23:13 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3DA940A
 for <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>; Sun,  9 Jun 2013 12:23:13 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from marck@rinet.ru)
Received: from woozle.rinet.ru (woozle.rinet.ru [195.54.192.68])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 665A0169A
 for <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>; Sun,  9 Jun 2013 12:23:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by woozle.rinet.ru (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r59CN95Y085950;
 Sun, 9 Jun 2013 16:23:09 +0400 (MSK) (envelope-from marck@rinet.ru)
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2013 16:23:09 +0400 (MSK)
From: Dmitry Morozovsky <marck@rinet.ru>
To: Ronald Klop <ronald-freebsd8@klop.yi.org>
Subject: Re: /tmp: change default to mdmfs and/or tmpfs?
In-Reply-To: <op.wyeu4ulx8527sy@pinky>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1306091620100.48048@woozle.rinet.ru>
References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1306091538490.48048@woozle.rinet.ru>
 <op.wyeu4ulx8527sy@pinky>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
X-NCC-RegID: ru.rinet
X-OpenPGP-Key-ID: 6B691B03
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3
 (woozle.rinet.ru [0.0.0.0]); Sun, 09 Jun 2013 16:23:09 +0400 (MSK)
Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Filesystems <freebsd-fs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-fs>,
 <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
 <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2013 12:23:13 -0000

On Sun, 9 Jun 2013, Ronald Klop wrote:

> > 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!
> > 
> > 
> 
> What keeps you from putting this in fstab and stop using the tmpmfs rc.conf
> variable?
> 'tmpfs           /tmp            tmpfs   rw,size=536870912      0       0'
> 
> I thought tmpmfs/varmfs infrastructure was more for diskless/full-NFS systems
> anyways.

I do not see much difference here, to be honest.  Either way, you have 
memory-backed /tmp (though via using /etc/rc.d/tmp you can fine-tune FS options 
a bit easier, at least for my PoV)

The question is: shouldn't we treat this as a default at least for usual 
amd64/i386 installation with "non-embedded" quantity of RAM (like, e.g. > 
512M)?

-- 
Sincerely,
D.Marck                                     [DM5020, MCK-RIPE, DM3-RIPN]
[ FreeBSD committer:                                 marck@FreeBSD.org ]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*** Dmitry Morozovsky --- D.Marck --- Wild Woozle --- marck@rinet.ru ***
------------------------------------------------------------------------