Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: gentoo-user@××××.de
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] tmp on tmpfs
Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 05:34:48
Message-Id: 20170524053434.GA2656@anonymous
In Reply to: [gentoo-user] tmp on tmpfs by Ian Zimmerman
1 On 17-05-23 at 22:16, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
2 > So what are gentoo users' opinions on this matter of faith?
3 I use an ext4 partition backed by zram. Gives me ~3x compression on the
4 things I normally have lying around there (plain text files) and ensures
5 that anything I throw there (or programs throw there) gets cleaned up on
6 reboot.
7
8 > I have long been in the camp that thinks tmpfs for /tmp has no
9 > advantages (and may have disadvantages) over a normal filesystem like
10 > ext3, because the files there are normally so small that they will stay
11 > in the page cache 100% of the time.
12 I've never actually benchmarked this. Most of the things I notice that
13 tend to end up there are temporary build files generated during
14 configure stages or temporary log files used by various programs (clang
15 static analyzer). Even if the entire file stays in the page cache, it'll
16 still generate IO overhead and extra seeks that might slow down the rest
17 of your system (unless your /tmp is on a different hard drive) which on
18 spinning rust will cause slowdowns while on an ssd it'll eat away at
19 your writes (which you may or may not have to worry about).
20
21 > But I see that tmpfs is the default with systemd. Surely they have a
22 > good reason for this? :)
23 Or someone decided they liked the idea and made it the default and
24 nobody ever complained (or if they did were told to just change it on
25 their system).
26
27 Either way, it'd be nice if someone actually benchmarked this.
28
29 --
30 Simon Thelen

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-user] Re: tmp on tmpfs Kai Krakow <hurikhan77@×××××.com>
Re: [gentoo-user] tmp on tmpfs R0b0t1 <r030t1@×××××.com>