Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 30

Thread: Fedora 18 Will Go For Tmpfs

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,399

    Default Fedora 18 Will Go For Tmpfs

    Phoronix: Fedora 18 Will Go For Tmpfs

    Fedora 18 will look to use tmpfs for its /tmp directory, after the feature proposal was approved today by the Fedora Engineering and Steering Committee...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTA4MTg

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    33

    Default

    I have been using tmpfs for /tmp and /var/tmp for years and years on my gentoo system. Why is this such a big deal?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flyser View Post
    I have been using tmpfs for /tmp and /var/tmp for years and years on my gentoo system. Why is this such a big deal?
    /tmp is fine but /var/tmp is supposed to be persistent across reboots.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    104

    Default

    It's not really a big deal if your individual user configuration uses tmpfs, but it's a big deal for huge (general purpose) distros. They have to take into account the amount of RAM their users have and maybe change their minimum spec requirements (could cause outrage). And even if we can assume that all users have 6Gb of RAM, we'll still have to consider their workloads. For example, I have /var/tmp/portage as tmpfs, but neither libreoffice nor chromium will compile because they're so huge. Granted, the portage problem is easily fixed, but this is Gentoo, and it's meant to be tweaked heavily.

    The other distros don't have it so easy. They must "please everyone" or die trying.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    73

    Lightbulb

    "Do NOT use it on /var/tmp, because that folder is meant for temporary files that are preserved across reboots. " https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Fstab

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by renkin View Post
    It's not really a big deal if your individual user configuration uses tmpfs, but it's a big deal for huge (general purpose) distros. They have to take into account the amount of RAM their users have and maybe change their minimum spec requirements (could cause outrage). And even if we can assume that all users have 6Gb of RAM, we'll still have to consider their workloads. For example, I have /var/tmp/portage as tmpfs, but neither libreoffice nor chromium will compile because they're so huge. Granted, the portage problem is easily fixed, but this is Gentoo, and it's meant to be tweaked heavily.

    The other distros don't have it so easy. They must "please everyone" or die trying.
    tmpfs can (and probably will) go to swap as well, which should still perform better than a real on-disk FS. As long as there's enough swap available, running out of memory shouldn't be an issue, or cause slow-downs.

    Oh, and as long as you set your /var/tmp/portage-tmpfs to >6GB and have enough swap, libreoffice will compile fine, without slowing down your machine more than running it on a real FS.

    As for putting /var/tmp on a tmpfs: aufs it with a squashfs that you auto-recreate once in a while, including during shutdown. Best of both worlds (apart from losing your temporary data in-between the last recreation and a crash/power-failure...), plus it's now compressed.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    418

    Default

    I have had /tmp, /var/tmp and /var/log on tmpfs on my laptop (with an SSD that doesn't do trim) for years running ubuntu. I know /var/tmp should be persistant, but on my laptop, I just didn't care enough

    "Do NOT use it on /var/tmp, because that folder is meant for temporary files that are preserved across reboots. " https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Fstab
    Though I appreciate the link, I think the FHS should be the correct link
    http://www.pathname.com/fhs/2.2/fhs-5.15.html

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    160

    Default

    tmpfs made Arch a miserable experience since packer and yaourt need a shit-ton of tmp space. It runs out far too quick if /tmp is mounted separately with a statically-sized tmpfs.

    You could always unmount /tmp to get around that.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,442

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LLStarks View Post
    tmpfs made Arch a miserable experience since packer and yaourt need a shit-ton of tmp space. It runs out far too quick if /tmp is mounted separately with a statically-sized tmpfs.

    You could always unmount /tmp to get around that.
    thats weird, i've never had that issue. however, if there was ever the occasion where something from yaourt failed, i never assumed it was because of the tmpfs.

    what i don't get is why don't distros use ramfs? that dynamically expands, so you pretty much only use up what you need.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    99

    Default

    Have they mentioned what video editing and CD/DVD/BD burning programs are supposed to do with their multi-GB temporary files after the switch? Where are we supposed to render our movies and build our ISOs?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •