Re: Swap partition vs swap file
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 12:23:42PM -0800, David Guntner wrote: Hi all, While still trying to figure out why Thunderbird isn't working so well with Dovecot, I figured I'd move onto another mystery; thought I'd seek out some opinions here. :-) When setting up Linux systems, I've always set up a separate swap partition. I was reading a few days ago that apparently there's a nifty way to do like Windows does (that alone should probably be good enough reason to *not* do it... :-) ) and set up a swap *file* instead. So, anyone? Pros cons? Is there any reason to prefer one over the other? Performance-wise? There's no difference (http://serverfault.com/questions/25653/swap-partition-vs-file-for-performance#25708). Flexibility-wise? Well, if you put your swap partition on LVM, then you can move it around and extend it just as easily as you could a file. Perhaps the only advantage a partition has is that you can fairly easily ensure it's at the fast end of your disk (that said, balance up how long the head's going to be there, with how long it takes to get there). One thing to know about up front - my new Debian setup is on my home server. It runs 24/7 and I *never* suspend/hibernate it. So since it never has to resume from a swap partition, that particular item is moot. :-) So, what is the common best practice (more-or-less) consensus on the subject these days? A partition is probably the most common. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Swap partition vs swap file
Hi all, While still trying to figure out why Thunderbird isn't working so well with Dovecot, I figured I'd move onto another mystery; thought I'd seek out some opinions here. :-) When setting up Linux systems, I've always set up a separate swap partition. I was reading a few days ago that apparently there's a nifty way to do like Windows does (that alone should probably be good enough reason to *not* do it... :-) ) and set up a swap *file* instead. So, anyone? Pros cons? Is there any reason to prefer one over the other? One thing to know about up front - my new Debian setup is on my home server. It runs 24/7 and I *never* suspend/hibernate it. So since it never has to resume from a swap partition, that particular item is moot. :-) So, what is the common best practice (more-or-less) consensus on the subject these days? --Dave signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Swap partition vs swap file
Pretty sure the partition is far more common. The file version is there if you need it, but hopefully you don't. Having the pages sit in a file on top of a filesystem just adds some extra layers, probably decreases performance a bit, AFAIK On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 12:23 PM, David Guntner dav...@akamail.net wrote: Hi all, While still trying to figure out why Thunderbird isn't working so well with Dovecot, I figured I'd move onto another mystery; thought I'd seek out some opinions here. :-) When setting up Linux systems, I've always set up a separate swap partition. I was reading a few days ago that apparently there's a nifty way to do like Windows does (that alone should probably be good enough reason to *not* do it... :-) ) and set up a swap *file* instead. So, anyone? Pros cons? Is there any reason to prefer one over the other? One thing to know about up front - my new Debian setup is on my home server. It runs 24/7 and I *never* suspend/hibernate it. So since it never has to resume from a swap partition, that particular item is moot. :-) So, what is the common best practice (more-or-less) consensus on the subject these days? --Dave -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAFoWM=8+c2iht4ij9nchJS5nW-KozvJhomogqyk=imc8tuz...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Swap partition vs swap file
Hello David, David Guntner dav...@akamail.net wrote: swap *file* instead. So, anyone? Pros cons? Is there any reason to prefer one over the other? Are you sure you need swap at all? If so, will your server still deliver acceptable performance if it is actively swapping? If yes, then the performance of the swap space clearly matters. If not, you want to avoid that anyways and just keep the swap around in case that something bad™ happens (to avoid the OOM to kick in immediately). A swap file gives you more flexibility at the cost of a slight performance loss. As swap is nowadays not really needed, I would hence suggest going with a swap file. Best regards, Claudius signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Swap partition vs swap file
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 12:23:42PM -0800, David Guntner wrote: Hi all, While still trying to figure out why Thunderbird isn't working so well with Dovecot, I figured I'd move onto another mystery; thought I'd seek out some opinions here. :-) When setting up Linux systems, I've always set up a separate swap partition. I was reading a few days ago that apparently there's a nifty way to do like Windows does (that alone should probably be good enough reason to *not* do it... :-) ) and set up a swap *file* instead. So, anyone? Pros cons? Is there any reason to prefer one over the other? One thing to know about up front - my new Debian setup is on my home server. It runs 24/7 and I *never* suspend/hibernate it. So since it never has to resume from a swap partition, that particular item is moot. :-) So, what is the common best practice (more-or-less) consensus on the subject these days? I use swap partitions on all my computers, but on a live USB stick I use a swap file. The reason for using the file is so I can easily change the size of the swap space (for instance, if I run out of room for my data). -Rob -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121121225811.gc27...@aurora.owens.net
