on Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 04:33:45AM -0800, Karsten M. Self
(kmself@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
> on Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 07:21:20AM +, Alexis Huxley ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> wrote:
> > On 2004-10-21, Gilbert, Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Think about it, if you want to dramatically improve the
On Thu, 2004-11-18 at 04:33 -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> on Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 07:21:20AM +, Alexis Huxley ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> wrote:
> > On 2004-10-21, Gilbert, Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
[snip]
> Oh, and why 2-3x RAM to start? Because you can add memory to a system
> pret
on Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 07:21:20AM +, Alexis Huxley ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> On 2004-10-21, Gilbert, Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > taken for rote. I was told back when I first started working with Unix that
> > the swap space needed to be at least twice the size of physical mem
On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 21:42 +0100, Pigeon wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 12:03:42AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > "Gilbert, Joseph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[snip]
>
> Well, boards that can take 4G are common these days, but there's a
> limit of 2G on swap size (at least up to 2.4; don't k
On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 12:03:42AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> "Gilbert, Joseph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > There is an issue that I do not fully understand that I have always kind of
> > taken for rote. I was told back when I first started working with Unix that
> > the swap space needed to
-Original Message-
From: Paul Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Well, that used to be the rule of thumb for a Linux-specific problem
> with swap space. Today, you can run without swap without a problem.
> I keep a gig of swap on hand to avoid out of memory problems at all
> costs and h
On 2004-10-21, Gilbert, Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> taken for rote. I was told back when I first started working with Unix that
> the swap space needed to be at least twice the size of physical memory in
> order to ensure a stable system.
I believe this was just a rule of thumb when memo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Johnno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have 131 meg of memory and a swap of about 100megs..
Ouch. You might see some performance gains from a bit more swap,
since you'll be able to swap more of what's not actively running out,
allowing for more file
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
"Gilbert, Joseph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There is an issue that I do not fully understand that I have always kind of
> taken for rote. I was told back when I first started working with Unix that
> the swap space needed to be at least twice the
I have 131 meg of memory and a swap of about 100megs..
The system is ran as a server..
- Original Message -
From: "Gilbert, Joseph"
> Hi all,
>
> There is an issue that I do not fully understand that I have always kind
of
> taken for rote. I was told back when I first started working
Joe writes:
> I was told back when I first started working with Unix that the swap
> space needed to be at least twice the size of physical memory in order to
> ensure a stable system.
> Is this truly the case?
Not any more.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a
acts about this issue but I could just be
overcomplicating the issue in my head.
Joe
-Original Message-
From: Scarletdown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 4:16 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: swap space size
On Thursday 21 October 2004 03:55 pm, Gilber
On Thursday 21 October 2004 03:55 pm, Gilbert, Joseph wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> There is an issue that I do not fully understand that I have always
> kind of taken for rote. I was told back when I first started working
> with Unix that the swap space needed to be at least twice the size of
> physical m
13 matches
Mail list logo
