> "mg" == Mike Gerdts writes:
mg> If Solaris is under memory pressure, [...]
mg> The best thing to do with processes that can be swapped out
mg> forever is to not run them.
Many programs allocate memory they never use. Linux allows
overcommitting by default (but disableable), b
On May 10, 2010, at 9:06 AM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Mon, 10 May 2010, Thomas Tornblom wrote:
>>
>> Sorry, but this is incorrect.
>>
>> Solaris (2 if you will) does indeed swap processes in case normal paging is
>> deemed insufficient.
>>
>> See the chapters on Soft and Hard swapping in:
>
On Mon, 10 May 2010, Thomas Tornblom wrote:
Sorry, but this is incorrect.
Solaris (2 if you will) does indeed swap processes in case normal paging is
deemed insufficient.
See the chapters on Soft and Hard swapping in:
http://books.google.com/books?id=r_cecYD4AKkC&pg=PA189&lpg=PA189&dq=solar
2010-05-10 05:58, Bob Friesenhahn skrev:
On Sun, 9 May 2010, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
So, Bob, rub it in if you wish. ;-) I was wrong. I knew the behavior in
Linux, which Roy seconded as "most OSes," and apparently we both
assumed the
same here, but that was wrong. I don't know if solaris and o
On Sun, 9 May 2010, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
So, Bob, rub it in if you wish. ;-) I was wrong. I knew the behavior in
Linux, which Roy seconded as "most OSes," and apparently we both assumed the
same here, but that was wrong. I don't know if solaris and opensolaris both
have the same swap beh
On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 09:24:38PM -0500, Mike Gerdts wrote:
> The best thing to do with processes that can be swapped out forever is
> to not run them.
Agreed, however:
#1 Shorter values of "forever" (like, say, "daily") may still be useful.
#2 This relies on knowing in advance what these proc
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 7:40 PM, Edward Ned Harvey
wrote:
>
> > From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
> > boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Richard Elling
> >
> > For a storage server, swap is not needed. If you notice swap being used
> > then your storage server is und
> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
> boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Richard Elling
>
> For a storage server, swap is not needed. If you notice swap being used
> then your storage server is undersized.
Indeed, I have two solaris 10 fileservers that have uptime
I know that according to the documentation Solaris is supposed to be
fully operational in the absences of swap devices. However, I've experienced
cases which I have not been able to trace the root cause of yet where the disk
access has increased drastically and caused the system to hang but it ma
On May 9, 2010, at 6:30 AM, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
> - "Bob Friesenhahn" skrev:
>
>> On Sat, 8 May 2010, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
>>>
>>> A vast majority of the time, the opposite is true. Most of the
>> time, having
>>> swap available increases performance. Because the kernel is able
On Sun, 9 May 2010, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
Are you sure about this? It is always good to be sure ...
This is the case with most OSes now. Swap out stuff early, perhaps
keep it in RAM and swap at the same time, and the kernel can choose
what to do later. In Linux you can set it in
/pro
> From: Bob Friesenhahn [mailto:bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us]
>
> On Sat, 8 May 2010, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
> >
> > A vast majority of the time, the opposite is true. Most of the time,
> having
> > swap available increases performance. Because the kernel is able to
> choose:
> > "Should I swa
> From: Bob Friesenhahn [mailto:bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us]
>
> On Sat, 8 May 2010, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
> >
> > A vast majority of the time, the opposite is true. Most of the time,
> having
> > swap available increases performance. Because the kernel is able to
> choose:
> > "Should I swa
- "Bob Friesenhahn" skrev:
> On Sat, 8 May 2010, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
> >
> > A vast majority of the time, the opposite is true. Most of the
> time, having
> > swap available increases performance. Because the kernel is able to
> choose:
> > "Should I swap out this idle process, or shou
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Richard Elling wrote:
>> Remove the line from /etc/vfstab and reboot.
>
> No need to reboot. Just edit the /etc/vfstab and use "swap -d"
> to remove the swap device.
I tried that on a VBox instance and it failed to remove the swap. I
guess only reboot id swap -d d
On Sat, 8 May 2010, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
A vast majority of the time, the opposite is true. Most of the time, having
swap available increases performance. Because the kernel is able to choose:
"Should I swap out this idle process, or should I dump files out of cache?"
With swap enabled, th
> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
> boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Karl Dalen
>
> If I want to reduce the I/O accesses for example to SSD media on a
> laptop
> and I don't plan to run any big applications is it safe to delete the
> swap file ?
>
> How do I co
On May 8, 2010, at 8:57 AM, Brandon High wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Karl Dalen wrote:
>> If I want to reduce the I/O accesses for example to SSD media on a laptop
>> and I don't plan to run any big applications is it safe to delete the swap
>> file ?
>
> When installing on a sma
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Karl Dalen wrote:
> If I want to reduce the I/O accesses for example to SSD media on a laptop
> and I don't plan to run any big applications is it safe to delete the swap
> file ?
When installing on a small drive (eg: 8GB thumb drive), the installer
doesn't crea
If I want to reduce the I/O accesses for example to SSD media on a laptop
and I don't plan to run any big applications is it safe to delete the swap file
?
How do I configure opensolairs to run without swap ?
I've tried 'swap -d /dev/zvol/dsk/rpool/swap'
but 'swap -s' still shows the same amount
20 matches
Mail list logo
