Linux - ServerThis forum is for the discussion of Linux Software used in a server related context.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Lately my server company has a habit of creating this "virtual partition". They tell me it's a default thing done by the OS (CentOS 5). Thing is, I don't remember this being a default thing in my installations of CentOS 5.
From what I gather it's a virtual partition with the bonus of mounting as noexec and being resizable. Now I may be completely wrong in this, but it seems to me a physical partition would be faster. The last couple servers I've had I've requested a physical partition be made.
The last server I had done I asked for a /tmp partition but ended up with a /usr/tmpDSK type partition. Now the last time this happened I had them add a physical one, but before I do that, is it really necessary?
Are there any pros and cons I'm missing? Are my assumptions wrong? Is this something that is done by default? Or is this just a mistake by someone customizing the partition map wrong?
It was perhaps created with a cpanel script rather than by the distro. It has security advantages.
I would be surprised if there was a measurable difference in speed. The small overhead of the loopback layer is going to be lost in the variation noise of any measurements you might make. It might even be slightly faster than a separate partition for /tmp, because the head seek times will be reduced.
If you are using some application that is speed bound by file access to /tmp (unlikely), then you would look at getting more memory (to provide more file caching space) or even create /tmp as a ram based filesystem.
"On most systems, this directory is cleared out at boot or at shutdown by the local system. The basis for this was historical precedent and common practice. However, it was not made a requirement because system administration is not within the scope of the FSSTND. For this reason people and programs must not assume that any files or directories in /tmp are preserved between invocations of the program. The reasoning behind this is for compliance with IEEE standard P1003.2 (POSIX, part 2)."
I, too, favour and implement emptying /tmp on boot except for any lost+found directory, quota files and security files (not familiar with the last) but I respect unSpawn's opinion and experience.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.