is net-swap really ever a good idea? it always seems like asking for
trouble, though in principle there's no reason why net IO should be
"worse" than disk IO...
... except for the need to allocate memory to build packets to send the swap
data.
I thought the implication was clear, that doing disk IO may also
require memory allocations.
There are still a few places that look at you funny if you suggest running
w/o swap. The 6 orders of magnitude performance difference for random page
touching performance suggests you should stare them back down.
absolutely: if you have reason to believe all your pages are uniformly hot,
more power to you!
Seriously, if you can avoid under-spec'ing/provisioning ram, you should.
in other words: buy extra ram to hold your cold pages! after all, dram
is only O($10/GB), and disk is O($0.05/GB). oh, wait...
wish for the wild west of OOM shooting random things in comparison to random
4k page touches. Yes, I've seen the latter.
thrashing is bad. it's not the same as *using* swap. that's why swap
still makes sense.
interesting thought: SSD is about $0.5/GB, so would make a great swap dev -
has anyone tried tuning the swap cluster size to match the SSD flash block?
regards, mark.
_______________________________________________
Beowulf mailing list, [email protected] sponsored by Penguin Computing
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit
http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
