size - The limit of allocated bytes for this tmpfs instance. The default is half of your physical RAM without swap. If you oversize your tmpfs instances the machine will deadlock since the OOM handler will not be able to free that memory.
tmpfs puts everything into the kernel internal caches and grows and shrinks to accommodate the files it contains and is able to swap unneeded pages out to swap space. It has maximum size limits which can be adjusted on the fly via ‘mount -o remount …’
Sorry I was testing DOH package so I missed that part. Anyways thanks for pointing it out Moeller. unfortunately I'm new to this mount, remount commands but lemme dig in and get familiar with it. BTW, can mount -o remount... explicitly expand the tmpfs storage?
# minimize the too large tmpfs (to avoid OOM), this is better handled by adding swap
mount tmpfs /tmp -t tmpfs -o remount,size=16000k,nosuid,nodev
here my goal was to reduce the size as I really did not want this to OOM my router. However tmpfs can be pushed out to swap/paging files, so if you enable a swap partition/file the OOM likelihood is reduced.
However /tmp IMHO rarely need to reach let alone exceed 2 GB... but that is for my use-cases, might be different for yours, though it sounds like you are not doing that based on a specific need.
Honestly no idea. When I looked at this some years ago, I was sufficiently satisfied with the solution above to not bother any further (on my current router with 1GB ram instead of my old router's 64MB I stopped bothering about this, since I consider 512MB way more than /tmp on a rputer should ever require and I assume that my use-cases would not OOM my router even if it only had 512MB ram; also I added a swap partition).
I just started using Aria2 and loved it. Thought I could use the available RAM to download files where servers cap the download speed. It would have been great to use whole RAM (except allocated for the system for fail-safe) to write files
Not 100% sure, but IMHO mounting a USB drive (flash or HD) seems like a better fit for filesharing/torrenting needs as it will allow persistent copies of files that survive across reboots, no? For most internet access speeds USB read speed is probably fast enough...
Honestly as of now I'm extremely happy with this setup besides I rarely ever reboot RPi4.
Note: I just noticed an issue with irqbalance not spreading traffic among all 4 cores. IDK if this is normal but I'll make another post on it.