From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F8AA138010 for ; Tue, 4 Sep 2012 15:55:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A24EBE0268; Tue, 4 Sep 2012 15:55:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yw0-f52.google.com (mail-yw0-f52.google.com [209.85.213.52]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81882E0028 for ; Tue, 4 Sep 2012 15:53:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: by yhpp61 with SMTP id p61so1342619yhp.11 for ; Tue, 04 Sep 2012 08:53:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=FYelZpp+wazQ4Ibbb5/7NJBG/MOuvS6psiAXJt2uvck=; b=MEdMdejwhYQFr5kmPSjECENBDLLR92qT/1WSuJe5bIX4cwLaZsiEphbojUvmWw3iAs vPZBeSjP28CN+tjS/wGcLUOJIHTS+XzxCWxQr3mjP5lHgH9vnPYAghdYkNXCIG2kvRtA YGrrTJu1d8Vg3QRXkAkwCAMCRBljQ8WILyWuqhtgfKoUuK+SR5PKGU2WvbvhXj2iJmlk civ71FXwQAxhazcLyr4W97meSiJrISzfLH573T/7btScRFsCCm1O4R1Pvip8cSElbjXS t8wqwGzKbXhgGYUD41owSFbmowT6gVzGgM8RYOgZilg3y9KnaFtFTuEdLHOxxGGPa55v drUw== Received: by 10.236.114.72 with SMTP id b48mr18903916yhh.7.1346774021888; Tue, 04 Sep 2012 08:53:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.5] (adsl-65-0-93-201.jan.bellsouth.net. [65.0.93.201]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id o5sm15174918anm.17.2012.09.04.08.53.39 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 04 Sep 2012 08:53:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <50462402.6030102@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2012 10:53:38 -0500 From: Dale User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120902 Firefox/15.0 SeaMonkey/2.12 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] dm-crypt + ext4 = where will the journal go? References: <504518A3.7000207@binarywings.net> <50460D03.6070808@gmail.com> <20120904171426.7d2dab68@khamul.example.com> In-Reply-To: <20120904171426.7d2dab68@khamul.example.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 4fab6f1b-c9d3-4015-8174-656eae030032 X-Archives-Hash: 0a0da414ad6966316d2431178f7e3b2f Alan McKinnon wrote: > On Tue, 04 Sep 2012 09:15:31 -0500 > Dale wrote: > >> I think the new method for determining swap is to use what makes sense >> and not the old rule of 'twice the ram'. > Alan's new rule of swap is: > > If you ever use swap as swap at all, find out how your machine is > misconfigured. When my 16G is "not enough" anymore, something is badly > wrong and it isn't not enough RAM and I need swap to wiggle around > in :-) > > I think the 2 x RAM rule stopped being applicable when the average > machine got to more than 16M. Some old memes are like zombies - very > hard to kill. > > This laptop has a "swap" partition, but it's not for swap, it's for > hibernate. And I never use it, it takes longer to come out of hibernate > than to just boot up from cold! These days I just suspend. > > None of this changes the fact that the kernel still does get upset when > it has no swap at all (even just a little bit). But that doesn't mean > we should still be using it as full-blown swap. > > > Yup. I have swap but I have it set to where it won't use it unless it is REALLY bad. I have swappiness set to like 20 or something. It will fill up my ram with cache and such but it rarely uses more than a few hundred kilobytes of swap. When I see it using that, I usually kill swap and add it back. I just don't like a machine with 16Gbs of ram using swap at all. I have thought about setting it to 10. Maybe then it will leave it alone until it really hits the fan. ;-) That said, I did roll over one night and notice that the CPU was going ape. I got up and into my chair to notice it was using almost all the ram and was starting to use a bit of swap. I switched to a console, ran htop and noticed that some KDE process was using about ~15.5Gbs of ram. It was crazy to see. I couldn't get it to die with kill -15 so I did a kill -9. I guess it had to know I really wanted it dead. It has not happened since so no clue on why it did that. Heck, it ran the same version of KDE for a good while and still didn't do it. Cosmic rays from Mars I guess. I would recommend at least 500Mbs or so of swap regardless of ram tho. Some swap is a good idea. Just try not to use it since it is dog slow. If you are using hibernate/suspend thingys then that is different. Isn't that when it has to be at least as much swap as you have ram? Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!