IMHO it would be more efficient to get IBM and Novel to address the issue and eliminate VDISK memory creep without having to configure multiple VDISKS with different priorities.
If memory constraints can be addressed in z/VM 5.3 with z9's (CMM) why can't the above issue be resolved ? Mark Brandt > -----Original Message----- From: Rob van der Heij [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 8:35 AM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: high water mark for swap space used? On 10/12/07, Romanowski, John (OFT) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ok, so the swap behavior is: look for allocated but reuse-able swap > blocks in the full higher/est priority swap partition before starting > to allocate from lower priority swap partition? swap allocation stays > within the higher priority (but purposely smaller) partitions as long > as it finds a free or a reusable block? Indeed. That's the entire trick: force Linux to use all free space in the first swap device before using the next one. Note that this is exact opposite of what "them from the other platforms" use with multiple swap devices (to spread the load evenly over multiple slow devices). Rob -- Rob van der Heij Velocity Software, Inc http://velocitysoftware.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
