> On Wed, 11 Aug 1999, MURRAY, Paul wrote:
>
> > Apparently twice your memory is good for swap space, and the largest
swap
> > you can use is 128M. Since I will have 128M of memory, I'd be looking at
two
> > swap partitions of 128M - one on each drive.
>
> OVERKILL!! Sorry, I'll stop shouting...
>
> 128 physical plus 128 virtual is 256Megs of total memory! Unless you're
> participating in a Mindcraft test, there's no need for that on a home
system.
> I've got 128 RAM and 128 swap, and I have never begun to fill up the swap.
If
> you ever do need more, you can always make a temporary swap file. The rule
of
> thumb for having twice the swap as RAM was invented back when everyone had
> 16Megs standard.
Cool. Actually, I was sugesting 128 phys + 128 hda + 128 hdb = 384M, which
is a lot I agree. The only things I can think of that _might_ begin to fill
it is a web browser keeping images in memory, or if I write a something that
builds big data structures.
> Since you will have two drives, let me make a suggestion that will speed
up
> your system: put your swap partition on the Windows drive (hda1).
Yup. Had planned to do this. Do I partition the drive _before_ putting
windows on? Also: It might be best if the swap partition was towards the
front of the drive to speed up access. So I'd be looking at
| windows boot | linux swap (128M) | windows data (rest of drive) |
On /hda. How big does windows boot need to be? It's not a linux question but
someone may know. Or is it the case that it does not matter where the swap
partition is?
> After all, even Windows has no need for 8Gb!
Bwahahahaha! Not yet, anyway. I'm leaving my big new drive for windows so as
to be able to fit a few games on it. If I include only the nessesary bits of
Win98, I might be able to fit one or two. By not putting office, explorer
etc on windows I'm hoping to train myself to use Linux for my usual stuff -
mail, browsing etc.
