| 1 |
On 05/12/17 13:07, Peter Humphrey wrote: |
| 2 |
>> (My new system when I get it working maxes out at 64GB ram so I'll have |
| 3 |
>> > 256GB swap and (currently) 16GB ram) |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> I've halved my original 4GB swap to 2GB since it never seems to be used. I'm |
| 6 |
> not brave enough to do away with it altogether though. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
I've just had a long thread with someone on the SUSE list who refuses to |
| 9 |
believe that the "twice ram" rule ever existed. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
This despite someone else actually describing the algorithm (from which |
| 12 |
one can see where the rule comes from), and me pointing out that (after |
| 13 |
Linus stripped out all the "awful" optimisation code) the early vanilla |
| 14 |
2.4 kernels enforced this rule by crashing if you broke it. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Swap was rewritten as a result of that, but I've never heard whether the |
| 17 |
fundamental algorithm was changed, so I still provision my systems on |
| 18 |
the assumption it's true. Disk is cheap ... my 4TB drives cost about |
| 19 |
£110, so that makes 128GB for swap cost, what, £3? I'll probably never |
| 20 |
need it, but hey, at that price :-) |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Cheers, |
| 23 |
Wol |
Archives