On Oct 13, 2011 8:32 PM, "Florian Philipp" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Am 13.10.2011 03:52, schrieb Pandu Poluan: > > Just stumbled upon this blog: > > > > http://www.webupd8.org/2011/10/increased-performance-in-linux-with.html > > > > anyone got any experience with zram/compcache on Gentoo? > > > > Rgds, > > > > Hmm, it seems like my reply was eaten by the mail server. Apologies if > you receive this twice: >
In addition to "the dog ate my homework", now we have a new excuse, "the server are my document" :-D Ah, progress ;-) > I use it on my laptop (4GB RAM, typically 1-2GB swap used). It > works pretty well but I can't give you any hard figures. > > I wrote my own init script for this. I can share it if you want. > Otherwise the sunrise, betagarden and mv overlays offer ebuilds for it. > I think the mv version is closest to mine. > What makes the proliferation of ebuilds? > What has been pretty confusing is that there are two versions: The > original one from Google(?) and the one in the mainline kernel. They > have different APIs (hint: if you have a userland tool instead of > manipulating /sys, it is the original version) and only the original > version can use a swap device as an additional backend for > uncompressable pages. With the mainline version (which I use), you can > only use zram as an additional swap device and give it a higher priority > than your normal swap. > In the kernel? What .config knob should I twiddle? I do prefer having zram support in the kernel. > /etc/fstab: > /dev/zram0 none swap sw,pri=1,discard 0 0 > /dev/sda7 none swap sw,pri=0 0 0 > > Only drawback so far: When zram is full, putting the laptop into standby > takes longer, maybe 15s compared to 3s without. Sometimes this can lead > to timeouts and the kernel aborts the suspend operation with an error on > dmesg. Reattempting it then succeeds. > Point taken. Do you think it's worth the slight annoyance? Rgds,
