[geeks] Choice of filesystem for /var

[Charles Shannon Hendrix]

Thu, 19 Oct 2006 @ 17:07 -0400, Joshua Boyd said:

> On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 05:08:52PM -0400, Charles Shannon Hendrix wrote:
> 
> > Just a clarification... I was thinking of a traditional /var where you
> > rarely depend on the data.
> > 
> > If you depend on the data, then a journaled FS makes sense.
> > 
> > It's just that /var is often the site of a lot of temp activity, and you
> > will pay a performance price there which is often higher than for other
> > common mount points.
> 
> On my highest performance requiring computers, /var/log, /var/tmp,
> /var/run, and /var/lib are symlinks to /tmp, which is a linux tmpfs.
> Yes indeed, that does mean that the logs are wiped on reboot.  It was
> either that or no logs though.

On Linux and Solaris I run /tmp as a memory filesystem, but never have
put /var there.

I want my logs for some months in most cases.

Also, /var/lib/ includes important parts of various software packages,
so I have to keep that around anyway.

Even /var/tmp can be important.  While not critical, some applications
do cache data there.  They should use /var/lib, but you know how
standards go...

-- 
shannon "AT" widomaker.com -- ["If you tell the truth, you don't have to
remember anything" -- Mark Twain]