On Mon, 30 Dec 2002, Marvin P. Dickens wrote: > > > So, the question remains, how does *disabling* swap aid in system performance. >Without swap, how does the kernel "make unused pages available for other work"? > > It does not use swap pages unless they are needed. Swap pages are slower than ram.
And if you run out of RAM, then what's slower, swap or a hung box? > > I'll agree with you here. So what you're *really* saying is that you should have >as much RAM as necessary to render Swap unecessary. But, how does the act of >*disabling swap* accomplish this? > > > The kernel does not use swap until all ram is exhausted. Ram is fast. Swap is slow. >Swap is > supposed to be a backup for low memory. It's slow. But, what it has become is a cure >all > of underprovisioned machines. > > I'm going to lunch :) If there is any more discussion about this I'll reply when I >get back. The only discussion is over your claim that disabling swap improves performaance, which it does not under a 2.4.x kernel. Or if it does, you haven't provided any documentation to back up that asertion. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Lonni J Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux Step-by-step & TyGeMo http://netllama.ipfox.com _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
