>No, the reason for having /tmp on a separate FS is so that damage to
>/tmp (which you don't care about) can't affect /. The more you write
>to a FS, the more chance you have of damaging it, even parts that you
>don't write to.
Of course if you put /tmp in another disk this make sense.
But if you take it in the same disk but in a different partition,
supposing as you say that you'll genrated defective sectors in /tmp
because it's too much stressed compared to the rest of the disk, then you
could have all the machine blocked all the time rereading one sector for
half a minute maybe plus scsi aborts and so on.
The best is to distribute the load of the I/O all over the place IMHO. So
you can just look at the time the HD is supposed to run fine, and after
such time you replace the HD.
Andrea
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/