Bastien ROUCARIES <roucaries.bast...@gmail.com> writes: > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 4:20 AM, Karl Goetz <k...@kgoetz.id.au> wrote: >> On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 10:32:42 +0100 >> Roger Leigh <rle...@codelibre.net> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 12:38:03PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote: >> >>> Following the discussion yesterday, I'd like to propose doing >>> something like the example below. It's possible to size a tmpfs >>> as a percentage of core memory, the default being -o size=50%. >>> Rather than setting an absolute value, we can size e.g. /run >>> as a percentage of total memory, which should scale with /run >>> usage better than a fixed value. >>> >>> Proposal: >> [...] >>> /run/shm: No default (use general tmpfs default of 20%) >>> /tmp: No default (use general tmpfs default of 20%) >> >> 20% doesn't seem like a lot for /tmp when people try and compile >> something. While its not something most people end up doing, it does >> seem odd to make people change their tempfs size before they can start >> building packages for debian/themselves. >> just a thought, > > And moreover for scientific computation /tmp need to be on an > harddisk. I do not want my 16GiB matric to go to memory when I have > only 8GiB of RAM.... > > Please do not put /tmp on tmpfs use a bind mount of a rw partition > > Bastien
Then you wouldn't be setting RAMTMP (or whatever the variable is called). MfG Goswin -- 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/87y63bk29p.fsf@frosties.localnet