Re: [gentoo-amd64] What should the swap size be for 4G ram?

[Volker Armin Hemmann <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de>]

On Samstag, 22. September 2007, Richard Freeman wrote:
> P.V.Anthony wrote:
> >> If following the old rule, 8G should be allocated for swap. I feel
> >> that is too much. Does 2.6 kernel really need so much of swap with 4G
> >> of ram?
> >>
> >> Was thinking of just using a 1G swap file for safety. Please share
> >> some thoughts on the this swap size issue.
> >
> > Please ignore this email. It looks like I have asked something similar
> > to this before. I will read the old thread.
>
> That's Ok, I got a chuckle out of it.  You have Duncan who doesn't use
> swap at all (I think), and you have me:
>
>              total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
> Mem:       2058448    2041388      17060          0      82084     420860
> -/+ buffers/cache:    1538444     520004
> Swap:     17514480    1152972   16361508
>
> I guess there is a happy medium.  But what else am I going to do with
> that odd space that doesn't fit easily into a RAID-5?  I figure that if
> the kernel can find a use for it I might as well let it...  :)  I
> probably have 50G more of unpartitioned space lying around since I've
> installed my 2 RAID-5s on non-identical drives.  I guess I'll just have
> to wait until ZFS takes off on linux...  :)

why? zfs is slow and is mixing things that should be in different layers. One 
argument against reiser4 always was 'it violates the layering' - well this is 
even more true for zfs.

And from this numbers:
http://tastic.brillig.org/~jwb/zfs-xfs-ext4.html

it doesn't look so great.
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list