According to Ron Marriage: While burning my CPU.
>
> Hi Paul,
>
> What everyone is saying is alright, but the Red Hat manual gives information
> that you should make a swap file that is double the size of your ram up to the
> size of 32 megs.
Then realy there seems to be a lot of confustion on Redhats part then. If
you look at the rhmanual html version located on their cd in /doc/rhmanual
then you will find this litte statement.
>From rhmanuel html, section 2.4
A swap partition
-- Swap partitions are used to support virtual memory. If your computer
has 16 MB of RAM or less, you must create a swap partition. Even if you
have more memory, a swap partition is still recommended. The minimum size
of your swap partition should be equal to your computer's RAM, or 16 MB
(whichever is larger).
Huum, now its "equal" the space in that statement..
Well one consolation about the big swap size is, the hard drive manufactuers
will have to keep making bigger harddrives to keep up the demand and the
memory chip makers will support the H/D folks by making RAM cheaper, thus in
turn making even more Swap space nessasary.
I remember when i had a linux system with as little as 4 meg Ram and 8M
swap. In thosedays if you did not follow "The rule of thumb" your system
would crash, of course times have changed, but it seems the old rule of
thumb has stuck.
Anyway, i'm not going to contradicht anyone, your thoughts are your own,
like mine are, i refuse to "waste" all that space to swap when its never
even been used, or possably never will be. I speak for myself on that one.
> After 32 megs of swap space the rule of thumb is 1.5 times the RAM with hadd
> drive space permitting.
> In other words if you have a big hard drive with lots of space then put in a
> bigger swap file. If you are using a small hard drive and space is minimal
> then anything over 32 you have to determine for yourself.
> I have 64 megs Ram and run an 81 meg swap.
> Most of the time my swap isn't even in use.
> Ron
>
>
> On Wed, 10 Feb 1999, Richard Adams wrote:
> >According to Paul Clyne: While burning my CPU.
> >>
> >> Good listers
> >>
> >> I have read the HOWTO on installing Linux and in it there is mention that
> >> your swap partition should be (20M - RamInMachine).
> >>
> >> This makes good sense. However why the 20M figure ?. Is there some
> >> reason that a bigger swap partition should'nt be used ?. What if you have
> >> 32M Ram, can you therefor not have a swap partition ?. Is a (say) 30M swap
> >> partition better than a 4M patition (assuming you had 16M ram).
> >
> >Well Ray Olszewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> explaned the details however in
> >practice different situations arise.
> >I have never used anything more than 32M swap on any machine i run or i have
> >installed for friends.
> >
> >My rule of thumb is, a standard size for swap, 32M no more regardless of how
> >much Ram there is.
> >
> >I run machines rangeing from "old crocks" 386/25SX 6Mb ram 12M swap, to my
> >own pride and joy, P200 64Mb ram 32M swap, (yes folks i finaly brought more
> >ram), what i find is that after 213 days of uptime on one machine, its a 16M
> >machine 16M swap, the swap never goes any higher than half its size, its a
> >heavaly loaded gate/router/cache machine as well.
> >
> >As to Ray's comment about the old rule of thumb "swap twice the size", i
> >rather think thats now old hat.
> >
> >>
> >> Am I missing something _blindingly_ obvious (i'm running RH5.2 2.0.36 on a
> >> P100).
> >>
> >> I hope my question makes sense and isn't too dumb..
> >>
> >> Thanks in advance
> >> -------------------------------------------------------
> >> Paul Clyne aka: pacman / pac
> >> at work : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> at play : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>
> >> The future is in our hands. Which way to the future ?
> >> --------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >
> >
> >--
> >Regards Richard.
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> --
> Ron Marriage
> Email = mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Blind Related Links
> http://www.seidata.com/~marriage/rblind.html
>
--
Regards Richard.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
