[HEADS-UP] Rawhide: /tmp is now on tmpfs
h.reindl at thelounge.net
Wed Jun 20 16:57:10 UTC 2012
Am 20.06.2012 18:49, schrieb Ralf Corsepius:
>> Since you can look at it either way in that regard, it's completely
>> to have the option that's best for most users as the default. As I see it,
>> that's to enable tmpfs for /tmp .
> Again: It is not reasonable, it's generally and basically unreliable and cause of instabilities and unreliablities.
> Whether it's close to being "usable" depends on a user's use-case. It might be usable on a 32GB RAM single-user
> laptop, but it's complete non-sense otherwise.
> Just have your fellow co-worker dump an arbitrary 100GB file to /tmp and watch your system to start misbehaving.
i fear people here are getting more and more ignorant fro teh reality
what is the topic of this dicussion?
someone (Lennart?) is thinking "tmpfs is cool"
to few people knowing REAL workloads and saying "it's ok for me"
i bet now someone is coming up wth "he must not dump a 100 Gb file to /tmp"
this is the wrong perspective
the right one is "the system must not crash if someone does"
if the system crashs the reason has tobe found and fixed
and the reason for this will be /tmp on tmpfs
there is nothing to think and calculate
it is simply a fact that drop a 100 or 200 Gb file into tmpfs
will bring down each machine existing currently and in the next
5-10 years and making a deafult behave this way is terrible
wrong, especially sell it as "improvement"
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the devel