From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
	by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <gentoo-user+bounces-98322-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
	id 1MWVOk-0006wf-1f
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 13:10:18 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 36661E07D7;
	Thu, 30 Jul 2009 13:10:16 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail.askja.de (mail.askja.de [83.137.103.136])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A654E07D7
	for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 13:10:16 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from static-87-79-89-40.netcologne.de ([87.79.89.40] helo=zone.wonkology.org)
	by mail.askja.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <wonko@wonkology.org>)
	id 1MWVOg-0007wz-UO
	for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 15:10:14 +0200
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
  (uid 1000)
  by zone.wonkology.org with local; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 15:10:10 +0200
  id 00011B83.4A719BB2.00006B54
From: Alex Schuster <wonko@wonkology.org>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} SSD instead of RAID1?
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 15:10:08 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.11.4 (Linux/2.6.28-tuxonice-r3_3; KDE/4.2.4; i686; ; )
References: <49bf44f10907260346y62a6f95dyfda763fceb0bcb39@mail.gmail.com> <4A708607.3090203@f_philipp.fastmail.net> <49bf44f10907300517m40c7c7b5u4305dfa375ce920@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <49bf44f10907300517m40c7c7b5u4305dfa375ce920@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200907301510.09243.wonko@wonkology.org>
X-Archives-Salt: 91e75421-fa79-43b2-8247-68321a68caf8
X-Archives-Hash: 1b96da8fd6df0d1f02f5bd2c6d6c1ac0

Grant writes:

> From what I understand of how Linux handles memory, it
> will fill it up as quickly as possible, and then free it as necessary.
>  This makes it difficult to determine how much RAM is necessary from
> watching top.
>
> I read on this list that the kernel needs *some* swap, even just a
> tiny amount, to function properly.  Is that true?

Not really. Think about live-CDs, the usually do not use swap space.
However, I heard that having at least a little swap space may increase 
performance, regardless of how much free RAM there is. Don't know if this is 
still true nowadays (if it ever was), I doubt it.

> If so, do you think
> it would be OK to put this tiny amount of swap on a cheap SSD?

If you have enough RAM (with 4GB you probably have, but that depends on how 
you use your workstation), you can even put your swap into RAM. Sounds 
silly, but http://kerneltrap.org/node/3660 claims it makes some sense. I 
don't believe it, but I'm no expert.

	Wonko