>This is not necissarily true. The System-Swap routine is optimized for
>arbitrary data. Gimp organizes its image-data in tiles and may perform
>better in swapping those tiles, since they are a very special data-structure.
>So the swapping routines could be optimized specially for those data
>(I have no idea if this is done currently) and perform better than the
Yes, but Gimp swaps to files, while system normally swaps to partition, and
if the admin is smart, to a fast disk which main (unique?) task is swapping,
maybe even sharing swap among a group of disks. Kernels swap is optimized (I
hope it is, otherwise... argh!), we dunno about Gimp.
This is more a per-site than theoric thing, I know. In the machines I used,
the best was to use kernel fuctions instead of Gimp (specially if it fills
your home dir up to quota limit).
Is there a way to get a valid performance measurement?
>The NFS problem should be adressed. Can we detect somehow if the
>configured swap-directory is a NFS-Direcrtory and issue a warning?
Via mount command. I think all Unix can do that.