On Friday, July 22 at 11:46 (-0700), Grant said:
> That's what I'm curious about. If some swap is good, why isn't more > better? Paul has demonstrated that a Linux system will put at least > 10GB to use and probably much more given the opportunity. Disk space > is so cheap, why isn't everyone running a 10GB or 100GB swap since > Linux will actually put it to use? > Vitamin C is good for you, but if you take a whole bottle of vitamin C tablets you will die :P Seriously... I think you are just not understanding what is being said (or maybe just trying to over-generalize it). There is never a time I'm using 100G of vm at one time, so why do i need 100G of swap? Sure, I could create a 100G swap partition, but the kernel is *never* going to need to use 100G of swap at once (unless I have a *seriously* broken app), so why bother? Moreover, 100G is going to take a LONG time to swap in/out (remember disk is slower than RAM). What we are saying is, swap is good for certain conditions (which I don't feel like explaining again).
