Re: RAM & Swap & Speed
But to my surprise the workstation ran faster--but before adding RAM it did NOT make use of the swap-partition and after the big RAM chip of course not too (checked it with #top). but more files are cached. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: RAM & Swap & Speed
Jon Radel wrote: > herbert langhans wrote: >> Hi Daemons, >> recently I had to add some more RAM on a workstation. Was 512MB before and >> is 2GB now, the reason was to give some graphic apps more space. >> >> But to my surprise the workstation ran faster--but before adding RAM it did >> NOT make use of the swap-partition and after the big RAM chip of course not >> too (checked it with #top). >> >> This was a Slackware installation. Had anyone experienced such effect on BSD >> as well? > > Why are you asking about Slackware file caching on a FreeBSD mailing > list? :-) > > In any case, what you're probably seeing is the effect of having lots of > spare RAM to cache files. In FreeBSD top look at the Cache and Buf > values up top. If you're doing a lot of file I/O, this can make a > noticeable difference, particularly if you're repeatedly reading the > same files. It has been pointed out that this response by me is incomplete, arguably misleadingly so. See http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-performance/2004-April/000769.html for much more technical detail on what is really happening. --Jon Radel smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: RAM & Swap & Speed
Jon Radel wrote: herbert langhans wrote: Hi Daemons, recently I had to add some more RAM on a workstation. Was 512MB before and is 2GB now, the reason was to give some graphic apps more space. But to my surprise the workstation ran faster--but before adding RAM it did NOT make use of the swap-partition and after the big RAM chip of course not too (checked it with #top). This was a Slackware installation. Had anyone experienced such effect on BSD as well? Why are you asking about Slackware file caching on a FreeBSD mailing list? :-) In any case, what you're probably seeing is the effect of having lots of spare RAM to cache files. In FreeBSD top look at the Cache and Buf values up top. If you're doing a lot of file I/O, this can make a noticeable difference, particularly if you're repeatedly reading the same files. However, as is usually the case, unless you do some benchmarks on *your* computer, it's hard to say more than "the first couple GB of RAM you add will probably make your workstation run faster." --Jon Radel It's not only the Cache and Buf values that show how much memory is used for caching - any memory which isn't being used by the programs/kernel and which isn't accounted for in the Free value can be used as cache. So for example my PC is currently showing 5668KB Cache and 110MB Buf but also there's also 638MB showing as 'Inact'. The vast majority of that 638MB will be used as cache. -- Bruce ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: RAM & Swap & Speed
herbert langhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Honestly, I would never think that adding RAM to a comp with still > unused space left could speed it up. That's because it doesn't have unused RAM. There are plenty of things that can be stored in RAM which don't need to be moved to swap if the RAM is needed. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: RAM & Swap & Speed
Hi Jon, all kosher here, I have my FreeBSD workstation and will put some more RAM into it. Just found it out on a penguin.. Honestly, I would never think that adding RAM to a comp with still unused space left could speed it up. Was just a coincident to find it out. But it clearly explains what I noticed--especially Firefox (lots of cache files) and the email client (switching folders with many lil files in there) had shown some difference. Will give the computer store a visit tomorrow.. Cheers herbs > Why are you asking about Slackware file caching on a FreeBSD mailing > list? :-) > > In any case, what you're probably seeing is the effect of having lots of > spare RAM to cache files. In FreeBSD top look at the Cache and Buf > values up top. If you're doing a lot of file I/O, this can make a > noticeable difference, particularly if you're repeatedly reading the > same files. > > However, as is usually the case, unless you do some benchmarks on *your* > computer, it's hard to say more than "the first couple GB of RAM you add > will probably make your workstation run faster." > > --Jon Radel ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: RAM & Swap & Speed
herbert langhans wrote: > Hi Daemons, > recently I had to add some more RAM on a workstation. Was 512MB before and is > 2GB now, the reason was to give some graphic apps more space. > > But to my surprise the workstation ran faster--but before adding RAM it did > NOT make use of the swap-partition and after the big RAM chip of course not > too (checked it with #top). > > This was a Slackware installation. Had anyone experienced such effect on BSD > as well? Why are you asking about Slackware file caching on a FreeBSD mailing list? :-) In any case, what you're probably seeing is the effect of having lots of spare RAM to cache files. In FreeBSD top look at the Cache and Buf values up top. If you're doing a lot of file I/O, this can make a noticeable difference, particularly if you're repeatedly reading the same files. However, as is usually the case, unless you do some benchmarks on *your* computer, it's hard to say more than "the first couple GB of RAM you add will probably make your workstation run faster." --Jon Radel smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: RAM & Swap & Speed
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 09:28:47PM +0200, herbert langhans wrote: > Hi Daemons, > recently I had to add some more RAM on a workstation. Was 512MB before and is > 2GB now, the reason was to give some graphic apps more space. > > But to my surprise the workstation ran faster--but before adding RAM it did > NOT make use of the swap-partition and after the big RAM chip of course not > too (checked it with #top). > > This was a Slackware installation. Had anyone experienced such effect on BSD > as well? All available RAM will be used for caching, reducing the need for slow disk accesses for repeated read I/O. Kris -- In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate. -- Charles Forsythe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RAM & Swap & Speed
Hi Daemons, recently I had to add some more RAM on a workstation. Was 512MB before and is 2GB now, the reason was to give some graphic apps more space. But to my surprise the workstation ran faster--but before adding RAM it did NOT make use of the swap-partition and after the big RAM chip of course not too (checked it with #top). This was a Slackware installation. Had anyone experienced such effect on BSD as well? Cheers herbs () ASCII Ribbon Campaign - against html/rtf/vCard in mail /\- against M$ attachments ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
