Archives
Archives
| From: | Diamond <diamond@××××××.ru> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] check-reqs.eclass: fail check-reqs_memory() for virtual rather than physical RAM | ||
| Date: | Thu, 04 Jun 2015 06:45:41 | ||
| Message-Id: | 20150604094527.44f00a6b@diamond.mlzone | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] check-reqs.eclass: fail check-reqs_memory() for virtual rather than physical RAM by Ciaran McCreesh |
||
| 1 | On Wed, 3 Jun 2015 21:32:34 +0100 |
| 2 | Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 | |
| 4 | > |
| 5 | > Swap is horrifically slow. It's better to fail than to use swap for |
| 6 | > stuff... |
| 7 | > |
| 8 | |
| 9 | Is it better to fail when you have already lost several hours in |
| 10 | compilations? Or is it better to use some additional parallel swap on a |
| 11 | bunch of HDDs or SDDs to FINISH emerge during 30 minutes more? I think |
| 12 | the latter is better than fail for no reason. BTW, RAM + swap is better |
| 13 | than swap only. |