2012/6/10 Wouter Verhelst wrote: > Sorry, but this is a biased summary, and therefore useless for what it > intends to be.
Yes, I know. It's biased toward the /tmp and real-world applications. >> "/tmp on tmpfs is good" quotes >> No real quotes here. Most of this and other threads were about why >> /tmp on tmpfs is not that bad. But there're no real quotes explaining >> why it's good. > > This is wrong. There were several (including by me). You dismissed them, > not considering them valid, but that doesn't mean they are. I dismissed everything that was not related to /tmp or some popular apps. A lot of people (including you) said that tmpfs makes things faster. But there were no examples of popular use-cases becoming faster because of /tmp on tmpfs, so I had nothing to quote. Nobody could provide examples or numbers of how much /tmp on tmpfs reduces amount of writes, and tests showed that tmpfs+swap may even increase amount of writes (hence not always good for SSD), tmpfs does not have 5% overflow safety, it does not help to protect from symlink attack and its name is not a reason to use it. :) (if I quoted "it's called *tmp*fs for a reason" in a "tmpfs is good" section it would be looking like humiliation, imho) If you need a tmpfs for your short builds you can mount it to /var/ram and use it there. But it's not related to /tmp, so I dismissed that too. Yes, tmpfs may be useful sometimes (and I even explained how to use it in "Alternatives" section), but that's outside of the topic of this thread if it's not about /tmp. If you'd said something like "I put /tmp on tmpfs and my ethernet became twice faster", or "Because of /tmp on tmpfs firefox loads pages 30% faster" that would be a good thing to quote. Especially if you could provide some details so that anybody could check it. :) But there were no examples, just some theories. And I tried to avoid theories because they may be wrong (I explained why some popular theories are wrong in the Q/A section however). > If you're going to post a thread summary, please do not filter out > information you don't agree with. Otherwise you're not posting a thread > summary, you're posting a 'my side of the fence' summary. I had to filter it. Otherwise it would be a copy of entire thread. :) Since the initial topic was not about tmpfs in general, but about /tmp and real-world applications, I filtered almost everything that's not related to it. It does not mean that I don't agree with that information. For example Stefan Lippers-Hollmann's test showed that kernel is building 15% faster on ext4 than on tmpfs, but I had not included that in summary, because people don't build their kernels in /tmp by default. I'm not stupidly opposite to tmpfs even for corner cases. I.e. if we could find that firefox works 30% faster with /tmp on tmpfs on PCs with >1GB RAM and disks with <1GB free space then... we could write an initscript, that checks for amount of RAM, free space and presence of firefox and mounts tmpfs to /tmp if it makes things faster. But there were no such examples, unfortunately. I could suggest a dozen of different solution, if only there were a problem to solve. Of course I could have missed some important examples about /tmp and real applications. Sorry if I did and I would be glad if you point them out. -- Serge -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caovenepbcx9pzr8nzttfm_x_p22pj9w0g0p4rhctkyv-tr5...@mail.gmail.com
