Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2013 07:25:55 -0600 (MDT) From: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> To: Dmitry Morozovsky <marck@rinet.ru> Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: /tmp: change default to mdmfs and/or tmpfs? Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1306090711250.70087@wonkity.com> 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
On Sun, 9 Jun 2013, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote: > 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! tmpfs has been working fine here for /tmp. I also use it for /usr/obj. It does not tie up a fixed chunk of RAM, and can grow to large sizes if necessary. And maximum size can be limited in fstab. (Possible improvement: allow human-readable sizes instead of just blocks.) One problem is that tmpfs is cleared by a reboot. This would surprise users expecting the default behavior (clear_tmp_enable="NO"), and would require some prominent warnings in the release notes and maybe in the installer. Or in the startup scripts: "/tmp on tmpfs, contents will be discarded on reboot".
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1306090711250.70087>