home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
- Path: sparky!uunet!scifi!castle!nomad
- From: nomad@castle.org (Lee Damon)
- Subject: Re: 0.97 patchlevel 3 available
- Message-ID: <1992Sep9.225408.4242@castle.org>
- Organization: The Castle, not-yet-Public Access Un*x Systems; Peekskill, NY
- References: <1992Sep6.174044.28957@mo.hobby.nl> <1992Sep7.080727.22080@klaava.Helsinki.FI> <1992Sep8.011444.21687@pool.info.sunyit.edu>
- Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 22:54:08 GMT
- Lines: 32
-
- In article <1992Sep8.011444.21687@pool.info.sunyit.edu> ujlh@pool.info.sunyit.edu (James Henrickson) writes:
- >the 16 MB limit. If a system has the maximum amount of RAM, which
- >is presently 16 MB, and needs more than 16 MB swap space on a regular
- >basis, isn't it slow? Using an additional swap partition or file for
-
- I havn'et done any tests on linux yet, but in general the rule I've followed
- in setting up the un*x systems I administer is:
-
- light load swap = 2x RAM
- moderate/medium load sawp = 3x RAM (this is the usual)
- heavy load swap = 4x+
- (where load is a factor of how bound your system is by the memory
- it is trying to use. The more processes, or the larger they are, the
- more swap you need, obviously.)
-
- The problem comes in when you are limited to 4 partitions on a disk. If
- you have big disks, it is easy to waste space.
-
- >opposite end of the disk!). If more than 32 MB of memory (16 MB
- >RAM, 16 MB swap) is needed on a regular basis, wouldn't it be better
- >to focus on adding better support for more RAM? Do any Linux users
- >use more than 32 MB on a regular basis?
- >
-
- I have 32 MB in my box, I'd like to make use of it.
-
- nomad
- --
- play: castle!nomad or nomad@castle.org \
- work: nomad@watson.ibm.com - Lee "nomad" Damon - \
- Seneschal; The Castle, Public Access Un*x Systems. / \
- - Unashamed - / \
-