On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 5:18 PM, clemens fischer <ino-news@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I mean, this is stupid. Many people keep /tmp in RAM, on a tmpfs, and > make it big enough, but not too big, as it takes away RAM when getting > loaded. there isn't much reason to limit tmpfs or /tmp ... you should be using a swap device/file/etc to ensure files residing in tmpfs are properly swapped out in the event memory becomes constrained, or the files are not in use. however, i would consider it a bug for applications to store *very* large files (exceeding 50-100M or so) in /tmp -- /var/tmp would be more appropriate, even for ephemeral/transient files -- idk what pacman is using /tmp for specifically, but i doubt it's extremely large *anything* (briefly extract/read the .INSTALL?). see: http://www.mjmwired.net/kernel/Documentation/filesystems/tmpfs.txt "Some people (including me) find it very convenient to mount it e.g. on /tmp and /var/tmp and have a big swap partition." ... are you memory constrained? in reality, you want your RAM 90%+ maxed at ALL times (cache/etc) ... the only time RAM is "wasted" is when it's not being used at all. -- C Anthony
