Thank you for your reply, Russell! On 02/07/2003 12:09 PM, Russell Coker wrote:
So far, I followed these thoughts as I always seemed to have enough swap space in this way of interpretation of swap usage. It never ran out.On Fri, 7 Feb 2003 02:47, Manuel Krause wrote:Such recommendations are only generalisations. Ignore them and look at what your system is doing. If your swap space never runs out and you don't expectIn the beginning of 2.4.0+ a relation of swapfile-to-RAM of 2-to-1 was recommended. Due to my several system changes to come in those times I
(Except for buggy applications, e.g Netscape 6 betas, that sometimes first filled RAM to max and then the swap ... the system finally stalling.)
your usage patterns to require more (including cron jobs and periods of unexpected load) then you have enough. If you run out of swap space then you need more, also you should have some swap even if you have a lot of memory. There's always data that isn't used much and can be paged out to make room for more disk cache.Seldom things happened on here this afternoon. Trying an "unexpected" load: Me changing an image with Gimp, opening some large chart in OpenOffice, a VMware doing disk defragmentation, running KDE2, and some other programs ... and Netscape 7.01 with several plugins also via crossover in separate plugin servers for some hours. Finally I had ~75% of the new huge swapfile filled.
From time to time I had this _rate_ before, so far, but not more. Today, closing the applications step-by-step revealed Netscape and plugins had about 256MB swap in use! (Of course I know NS6++ have always been "memory hogs".) It was an acoustical and visual experience listening to 2 disks activity and watching KSysguard to show the actions.
I just want to report back and now find it quite funny having had a max 75% filled swap so far, then repartitioning to have a doubled Linux swap, and having applications that use it up that excessively... still having a max 75% filled swap.
;-))
Best regards,
Manuel
BTW Anything that is worth saying in a .sig can be said in 4 lines.
Yes. It should. But it was not intended as .sig.
