EDIT-THIS Thread is meant for GROUP discussion regarding use of a /tmp mount.

Onebuck,

I noticed in another thread you just posted in, you have;
/dev/sda9 /tmp

Is this a common practice? Do you run X? I ask because I seem to recall some issue with X that I had, and I eliminated mounting tmp separately. I recall no specifics. I was just troubleshooting something and it was one of the things I removed to get to a more generic setup and never went back to.

Thanks

If you have a question for a specific forum member, right-click on their name and use the "private message" facility to contact that member.

As to the location of /tmp, some sysadmins like to limit the size of it by putting it in it own partition, but the most common reason for mounting it separately is to put it on a "fast access" device so activity using temporary files (such as sockets) can respond better without impacting the rest of the system. In the case you site, since it's just a drive partition rather than a different device, that's probably not his reason, but other sysadmins may put temp on, for example, a RAM disk.

Hi,

I agree that a 'PM' would be the norm to contact someone for a personal question.

Yes, the '/tmp' is being mounted on a independent partition. If you mount the '/tmp' on a separate partition then you will have less chance of problems with the system for response or flooding.

I setup this way to allow adjustment at a later date. Sometimes a ramdisk is used or alternate storage methods. The '/var' is setup the same way and reason. This particular machine is still setup from the initial setup state. I have other systems that are servers that are setup to their final state awaiting to come on line. Two many irons in the fire right now. I usually stage my re-generations but things have been happening too fast lately so I need to migrate sooner then expected. Things have been wearing out, even myself so I had better get back on track soon.

The newer systems having more RAM do avail the admin to setup things with ramdisks. 'SSD' usage allows faster access without system RAM being committed to a ramdisk. Thus allowing you to have the speed of a ramdisk via the 'SSD'.

This is NOT meant to be a private message, my apologies. I set this thread up very poorly. I'll note the original. And thanks for your responses.

I always used to build true Internet servers with a separately mounted /tmp. Mainly because aps would blow up the ext2 file system, and it would always be due to bad write activity in /tmp.

Fast forward about 10 years, and a friend at College, a Linux Admin, suggests I look at Ubuntu. I do, and I'm loving it. So I go back to my roots, wipe Ubuntu, and install Slackware on a RAID partitioned with a /tmp and a /usr/local/etc. But X apps would crash, and X itself would crash. So I wiped the drive again, and installed everything on a single partition. That was last August, and this system (2.6.25) has been quite stable ever since.

So I assumed until now my X problems were due to mounting /tmp as a separate volume. But others are using a /tmp mount with no X problems?

Thanks

I've always run with a separate /tmp and never had any problems from doing so. I think your X issues must have stemmed from elsewhere.

Thank you, I have learned yet again.