| 1 |
On Dienstag, 13. März 2007, dustin@×××××××.us wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 09:46:39AM -0300, Joaquim Quinteiro Uchoa wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Anthony is really right: it depends if you need swap. In a server with |
| 4 |
> > 30 users, |
| 5 |
> > problably not, even in the case where the access is simultaneous (by |
| 6 |
> > experience with servers with 2GB of RAM and 2GB of swap). |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> One of the benefits of swap is that unused application text, data, etc. |
| 9 |
> can be paged out in a fairly permanent fashion. Without swap, that |
| 10 |
> stuff has to sit in RAM, even if it's not touched for hours or days. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
no it has not to stay in ram. Unused stuff that is not 'dirty' IE identical to |
| 14 |
the stuff on harddisk, can be kicked out of ram, when the space is needed. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
And for some funny reason, loading something out of swap is much slower than |
| 17 |
loading it from the fs.... |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
50mb in swap - and everything is slow. So slow as if every bit is fetched by a |
| 20 |
mule caravan. And it does not matter if it is a swap partition or a swap |
| 21 |
file. It is slow. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
But there is an easy way to get the box back to normal speed: swapoff -a && |
| 24 |
swapon -a ... |
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |
Archives