Faisal wrote:
>
> > The PC seems relatively slower(May be because I haven't used it for long)
> > but good part is that no swap and hence even netscape comes a lot faster.
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong,
Well, I was not verbose enough...;-) Any way...
>but are you saying that by not enabling swap, you're
> are ending up with a faster machine ? I believe that you could use Linux
> without swap pretty comfortably, but when it starts thrashing - it'll trash
> like hell. *Everything* will get slow. I once forgot to switch on swap on a
> hand made installation, but wafter about 2 hours, when my system got loaded,
> the thing slowed down tremendously. What got me interested is the fact that
> since there wasn no swap, there shouldn't be much disk activity. But the HDD
> light was burning like hell. Unfortunately, I couldn't really check it up
> because I couldn't log on (too slow). So I guess 'thrashing' wouldn't be the
> right term to use...
> Anyways, if I'm correct, your swap wouldn't be used unless you needed it, so
> what's the bit speed-saver by not enabling swap ?
Problem was, when I had 64MB, starting netscape was a pain because it used to
grab some 10MB swap(God knows for what). I had 2.2.16-3 then. Then I upgraded to
128MB, but somehow only 64MB was recognised so I was stuck.
With 2.4.1, all 128MB is used and hence it does not need to use swap.
So I said, 'No swap'. I didn't mean I disabled swap...
Bye
Shridhar
P.S. I had a fairly long thread earlier on this so I was talking w.r.t. that.
Didn't take pain to repeat in enough....;-)
----------------------------------------------
The mailing list archives are available at
http://lists.linux-india.org/cgi-bin/wilma/linux-india-help
