| 1 |
On Mon, 28 May 2012 21:24:59 +0200, Jarry wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> > But why would you want to? |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> I do not see any advantage in having /run on tmpfs. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Even though you have had several benefits explained to you? Files in /run |
| 8 |
have to be available and writeable at all times from early boot onwards, |
| 9 |
using a hard disk filesystem cannot guarantee this. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> > will be automatically moved to your swap partition if doing so |
| 12 |
> > benefits your system. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> I'm not sure it is true. I have read somewhere that tmfps is |
| 15 |
> never moved to swap. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
You can justify anything you like with something you have read somewhere. |
| 18 |
However, if you read the kernel docs on tmpfs you'll see |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
"tmpfs puts everything into the kernel internal caches and grows and |
| 21 |
shrinks to accommodate the files it contains and is able to swap |
| 22 |
unneeded pages out to swap space. It has maximum size limits which can |
| 23 |
be adjusted on the fly via 'mount -o remount ...'" |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Barth's Distinction: |
| 30 |
There are two types of people: those who divide people into two types, and |
| 31 |
those who don't. |
Archives