On Wed, 06 Jun 2001, Dr S.M. Huen wrote:
> The whole screaming match is about whether a drastic degradation on using
> swap with less than the 2*RAM swap specified by the developers should lead
> one to conclude that a kernel is "broken".
I would argue that any system that performs substantially worse with swap==1xRAM
than a system with swap==0xRAM is fundamentally broken. it seems that w/
todays 2.4.x kernel, people running programs totalling LESS THAN their physical
dram are having swap problems. they should not even be using 1 byte of swap.
the whole point of swapping pages is to give you more memory to execute
programs.
if I want to execute 140MB of programs+kernel on a system with 128 MB of ram,
I should be able to do the job effectively with ANY amount of "total memory"
exceeding 140MB. not some hokey 128MB RAM + 256MB swap just because the kernel
it too fscked up to deal with a small swap file.
--
/*------------------------------------------------**
** Mark Salisbury | Mercury Computer Systems **
**------------------------------------------------*/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
