| 1 |
Apparently, though unproven, at 18:53 on Wednesday 25 May 2011, Volker Armin |
| 2 |
Hemmann did opine thusly: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Wednesday 25 May 2011 16:20:58 Alex Schuster wrote: |
| 5 |
> > So, 27 minutes to put 885MB of swap back into RAM, with the double amount |
| 6 |
> > of that being free RAM. I monitored with iotop, and the transfer rate |
| 7 |
> > started around 60-100 K/s, later it went higher. But the average |
| 8 |
> > transfer rate is 550K/s. Shouldn't swap be, like, a little faster? |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> no, sounds about right. Swap in linux is brain damaging slow. If you think |
| 11 |
> about it your gall bladder might explode. That slow. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
For years now I've considered only two possible uses for linux swap: |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
- a teeny small one just for wiggle room to try and hold that POS called the |
| 16 |
oom killer at bay |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
- a bigger one the same size as total RAM, as a place to put the suspend image |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Every other usage makes no sense at all (RAM being so cheap and all). In fact, |
| 22 |
I've banned swap on all company servers except databases. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
I'd be interested to hear any current use cases where swap delivers a provable |
| 25 |
benefit. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
Archives