On Wed, 29 May 2013 19:52:02 + (UTC)
jb wrote:
RW rwmaillists at googlemail.com writes:
BTW you mean paging, or swap use, rather that swapping. Linux
supports only paging, so it can be taken as read that swapping
means paging, but FreeBSD supports both.
Yes, there is some
RW rwmaillists at googlemail.com writes:
...
Yes, there is some confusion about the diff, if any, between paging
and swapping.
Paging - copying or moving pages between physical memory (RAM) and
secondary storage (e.g. hard disk), in both directions.
Swapping - nowdays is synonymous
RW rwmaillists at googlemail.com writes:
On Sun, 26 May 2013 12:36:42 + (UTC)
jb wrote:
But, swapping is also a symptom, not a problem.
It is never a good idea to let it get to that point.
No, there are thing that are better on disk than in memory. The most
common example is
On Sun, 26 May 2013 18:48:18 -0500
Adam Vande More wrote:
Um, that is wrong. It is in fact the basically the point of TRIM.
And SSD's typically use the best form of wear leveling and it's
usually advisable to leave a bit of the drive unpartitioned/unused to
ensure the wear leveling works
Fred Morcos fred.morcos at gmail.com writes:
..
The improvement effect can be
noticed on large inputs. These algorithms will most probably perform quite
badly on small inputs.
I think your concern has been addressed in review of various algos where base
case identification helped to avoid
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 1:19 PM, jb jb.1234a...@gmail.com wrote:
Fred Morcos fred.morcos at gmail.com writes:
..
The improvement effect can be
noticed on large inputs. These algorithms will most probably perform
quite
badly on small inputs.
I think your concern has been addressed in
On Sun, 26 May 2013 12:36:42 + (UTC)
jb wrote:
But, swapping is also a symptom, not a problem.
It is never a good idea to let it get to that point.
No, there are thing that are better on disk than in memory. The most
common example is tmpfs. It's much better that files left on tmpfs can
On Wed, 29 May 2013 13:57:22 +0200
Fred Morcos wrote:
Linux has a sysctl variable vm.swappiness which you can set to 0 or 1
out of 100. Not sure how to achieve the same on FreeBSD, maybe one or
more combinations of the following?
You'll probably make things worse.
vm.stats.vm.v_swappgsout:
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 6:19 AM, jb jb.1234a...@gmail.com wrote:
- overcommitment of memory (a bluff asking to be punished by OOM killer)
No self respecting Unix has an OOM by default.
- OOM killer
Are you suggesting FreeBSD does this crap?
Besides, they allow sloppy/dangerous programming.
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.comwrote:
Normal dynamic wear leveling on a modern SSD will be better than
imposing an FS- backed swap for 4GB partion occupying a small fraction
of total drive space.
Quite so.
- M
On Wed, 29 May 2013, Michael Sierchio wrote:
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.com wrote:
Normal dynamic wear leveling on a modern SSD will be better than
imposing an FS- backed swap for 4GB partion occupying a small fraction
of total drive space.
And you
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com wrote:
And you don't think the presence of TRIM--where the SSD can actually know
which blocks are no longer in use--is worthwhile?
As a whole, TRIM is worthwhile. However when an SSD is
overprovisioned it provides a lot of
PS -- Moderating questions@ is just awful. I'm disappointed.
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com wrote:
And you don't think the presence of TRIM--where the SSD can actually know
which
RW rwmaillists at googlemail.com writes:
On Sun, 26 May 2013 12:36:42 + (UTC)
jb wrote:
But, swapping is also a symptom, not a problem.
It is never a good idea to let it get to that point.
No, there are thing that are better on disk than in memory. The most
common example is
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 2:52 PM, jb jb.1234a...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, Linux utilizes swap space as part of virtual memory.
As does every other Unix.
--
Adam Vande More
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
On May 29, 2013, at 3:52 PM, jb jb.1234a...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, there is some confusion about the diff, if any, between paging and
swapping.
Paging - copying or moving pages between physical memory (RAM) and secondary
storage (e.g. hard disk), in both directions.
Swapping - nowdays is
Follow up comment.
It has been pointed out to me that there is Varnish software taking advantage
of system VMM and swap space.
Well, there are cache-oblivious algorithms that perform as well, and so they
make the above (disk access model; cache-aware model) unnecessary
(obsolete ?) and are
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:42 PM, jb jb.1234a...@gmail.com wrote:
Follow up comment.
It has been pointed out to me that there is Varnish software taking
advantage
of system VMM and swap space.
Well, there are cache-oblivious algorithms that perform as well, and so
they
make the above
On 26. mai 2013, at 10:58, M. V. bored_to_deat...@yahoo.com wrote:
But recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert that I shouldn't have swap
partition for my server, and having swap partition could make my server
unstable
Any chance this could be a simple misunderstanding?
That he objected
jb jb.1234abcd at gmail.com writes:
M. V. bored_to_death85 at yahoo.com writes:
recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert that I shouldn't have
swap partition for my server, and having swap partition could
make my server unstable.
I think your FB expert was up to something. I bet he spoke
hi everyone,
I have a 24/7 network server/gateway with FreeBSD-8.2 on a SSD drive. it's
partitioned as normal (/ , /tmp, /var , /usr and swap) for a long time now. But
recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert that I shouldn't have swap partition for
my server, and having swap partition could
shouldn't have swap partition for my server, and having swap
partition could make my server unstable. this was so strange for me,
and I searched a lot but couldn't find a reason for this claim.
because it is a false claim. I never ever have had any system with
working hard, that gave a problem because
time now. But recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert that I
shouldn't have swap partition for my server, and having swap
partition could make my server unstable. this was so strange for me,
and I searched a lot but couldn't find a reason for this claim.
because it is a false claim. I never
that I shouldn't have swap
partition for my server, and having swap partition could make my server
unstable. this was so strange for me, and I searched a lot but couldn't find
a reason for this claim.
so my question is simple:
- could having a swap partition, be a bad thing for my FreeBSD
on a SSD
drive. it's partitioned as normal (/ , /tmp, /var , /usr and swap)
for a long time now. But recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert
that I shouldn't have swap partition for my server, and having swap
partition could make my server unstable. this was so strange for me,
and I searched
On 26/05/2013 09:58, M. V. wrote:
hi everyone,
I have a 24/7 network server/gateway with FreeBSD-8.2 on a SSD drive. it's
partitioned as normal (/ , /tmp, /var , /usr and swap) for a long time now.
But recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert that I shouldn't have swap
partition for my
M. V. bored_to_death85 at yahoo.com writes:
hi everyone,
I have a 24/7 network server/gateway with FreeBSD-8.2 on a SSD drive. it's
partitioned as normal (/ , /tmp,
/var , /usr and swap) for a long time now. But recently I heard from a
FreeBSD expert that I shouldn't have
swap partition
network server/gateway with FreeBSD-8.2 on a SSD drive.
it's partitioned as normal (/ , /tmp, /var , /usr and swap) for a
long time now. But recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert that I
shouldn't have swap partition for my server, and having swap
partition could make my server unstable
, /var , /usr and swap) for a
long time now. But recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert that I
shouldn't have swap partition for my server, and having swap
partition could make my server unstable. this was so strange for me,
and I searched a lot but couldn't find a reason for this claim.
because
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 6:32 PM, Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com wrote:
Another problem with SSDs is that they can have difficulty with wear
leveling. This is even worse with swap because there is no way to use TRIM
to tell the SSD about blocks that have been freed.
Um, that is wrong. It is
that have been freed.
Um, that is wrong.
Which part? A FreeBSD swap partition has no way to use TRIM, so I
suggest using a swap file on top of UFS, which does support TRIM.
It is in fact the basically the point of TRIM.
And SSD's typically use the best form of wear leveling and it's
usually
of common swap usage
isn't random. All this is of course assuming we're dealing with a
quality drive. If you're using a cheap Chinese knock off, all bets
are off.
A FreeBSD swap partition has no way to use TRIM, so I suggest
using a swap file on top of UFS, which does support TRIM.
Using TRIM should
I figured out a way to install swap as the only
fixed-sized partition such that whatever is left is marked as
BSD (165) but I am not sure if this is a workable solution so I
am asking for suggestions.
If I set up the disk label reference file as follows:
# /dev/ad0s1:
8
On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 11:28:13AM -0600, Martin McCormick wrote:
I figured out a way to install swap as the only
fixed-sized partition such that whatever is left is marked as
BSD (165) but I am not sure if this is a workable solution so I
am asking for suggestions.
If I set up
Jerry McAllister writes:
This could be a problem. I think using the '*' for size will
cause it to use the whole remaining space for that partition.
Even though it logically starts at 2097152, it might not come out
even on a good boundary or something like that. It really seems to
like to
do.
ad0s1-1=ufs 77116032 / 1
ad0s1-2=swap 0
or should it be ad0s1a and ad0s1b?
When using ad0s1a and ad0s1b, there are no error
messages, but it also didn't create the swap partition. Thank you.
Martin McCormick
___
freebsd-questions
Here is the output of fdisk from the drive to be formatted.
*** Working on device /dev/ad0 ***
parameters extracted from in-core disklabel are:
cylinders=77504 heads=16 sectors/track=63 (1008 blks/cyl)
Let's try a million or so blocks left as swap.
ad0s1-1=ufs 77116032 / 1
#That
Our FreeBSD systems mostly have a very simple disk layout. There
is a 1 or 2-gigabyte swap partition and all the rest is FreeBSD.
When manually configuring these partitions in sysinstall, I
usually set up swap first with a 1GB size and then use the
remaining space by selecting the values
#All the rest is FreeBSD with soft updates.
ad0s1-2=ufs 0 / 1
so they are defined in numerical sequence.
On 1/27/10, Martin McCormick mar...@dc.cis.okstate.edu wrote:
Our FreeBSD systems mostly have a very simple disk layout. There
is a 1 or 2-gigabyte swap partition and all the rest is FreeBSD
Bob Johnson writes:
The only thing that looks out of place is that you have defined
ad0s1-2 before ad0s1-1. I've never tested it, but perhaps this is
causing it to get confused when calculating the disk layout? In other
words, perhaps you should use
#1G swap followed by / on rest of disk.
Eugen Udma wrote:
Hello,
I have FreeBSD installed on my desktop, with 2 GB of RAM and
4 GB swap partition and this swap partition is very seldom
touched by the system and then only 2-3% used.
I want to install FreeBSD on a laptop with 4 GB of RAM and a
hard disk of 100 GB. Should I
On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 05:13:28PM -0800, Eugen Udma wrote:
Hello,
I have FreeBSD installed on my desktop, with 2 GB of RAM and
4 GB swap partition and this swap partition is very seldom
touched by the system and then only 2-3% used.
I want to install FreeBSD on a laptop with 4 GB of RAM
Jerry McAllister writes:
But, note that you are talking only a small percentage
of your Hd space, so it is hardly worth quibbling about.
In most places, disk space is dirt cheap. If you're really
worried, find a 5-10 gbyte drive used and make it a dedicated swap
disk.
Hello,
I have FreeBSD installed on my desktop, with 2 GB of RAM and
4 GB swap partition and this swap partition is very seldom
touched by the system and then only 2-3% used.
I want to install FreeBSD on a laptop with 4 GB of RAM and a
hard disk of 100 GB. Should I waste 8 GB for a swap
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 17:13:28 -0800 (PST)
Eugen Udma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I want to install FreeBSD on a laptop with 4 GB of RAM and a
hard disk of 100 GB. Should I waste 8 GB for a swap partition,
as it is recommended in the handbook?
Probably not. The twice the ram rule is for people who
I have two swap partitions, ad4s1b is part of my main slice, and ad6s1b
is on a second drive. The permissions are the same, but I can't
overwrite the second one. The same thing happens whether I use swapoff
or reboot into single user mode.
What's the difference?
# dd if=/dev/random
RW wrote:
I have two swap partitions, ad4s1b is part of my main slice, and ad6s1b
is on a second drive. The permissions are the same, but I can't
overwrite the second one. The same thing happens whether I use swapoff
or reboot into single user mode.
What's the difference?
# dd if=/dev/random
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 01:39:20 +0100
Bruce Cran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
RW wrote:
I have two swap partitions, ad4s1b is part of my main slice, and
ad6s1b is on a second drive. The permissions are the same, but I
can't overwrite the second one. The same thing happens whether I
use swapoff
]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, February 4, 2007 2:28:47 PM
Subject: Re: swap file vs swap partition
Aloha Guy wrote:
Thanks for the input. You do have good points. The only issue with
swap partitions is that it seems like you need to increase it everytime
you increase the physical
Greetings everyone:
I am planning to build a few new boxes which will run -RELEASE and -CURRENT and
I have a question about the swap file. In the past, I had always used a swap
partition of 256MB since I originally had 128MB system memory in the 1990's but
my system has been upgraded to 2GB
Aloha Guy wrote:
Greetings everyone:
I am planning to build a few new boxes which will run -RELEASE and -CURRENT and
I have a question about the swap file. In the past, I had always used a swap
partition of 256MB since I originally had 128MB system memory in the 1990's but
my system has
Thanks for the input. You do have good points. The only issue with swap
partitions is that it seems like you need to increase it everytime you increase
the physical memory. Is there a swap partition size limit that pretty much
will handle anything and setting a number larger than
Aloha Guy wrote:
Thanks for the input. You do have good points. The only issue with
swap partitions is that it seems like you need to increase it everytime
you increase the physical memory. Is there a swap partition size limit
that pretty much will handle anything and setting a number
.
John
- Original Message
From: Scott Long [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Aloha Guy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, February 4, 2007 2:28:47 PM
Subject: Re: swap file vs swap partition
Aloha Guy wrote:
Thanks for the input. You do have good points
On Monday 05 February 2007 08:58, Scott Long wrote:
Processors and memory have vastly outpaced the speed of disks; any
amount of swapping is going to be percieved as being very slow and
something that should be avoided. Since RAM is also very cheap now,
most people just load enough RAM into
On Sun, February 4, 2007 3:53 pm, Aloha Guy wrote:
Thanks for the input. You do have good points. The only issue with
swap partitions is that it seems like you need to increase it
everytime you increase the physical memory. Is there a swap partition
size limit that pretty much will handle
Please wrap your lines and don't top-post.
On Sun, 2007-Feb-04 15:24:39 -0800, Aloha Guy wrote: What I actually
meant was, I know in the old days, if you had 128MB, you want a 256MB
swap but with 2GB RAM, isn't 4GB going to be overkill for a swap or
are you saying that a 2GB swap will work? I'm
I just upgraded my laptop from 512MB to 1024MB memory.
It is said that the /swap partition has to be at least as much as the maximum
available memory, but my current value is still based on the old 512MB size.
Can I increase the size of the existing swap partition or do I have to create a
new
Kiffin Gish schrieb:
I just upgraded my laptop from 512MB to 1024MB memory.
It is said that the /swap partition has to be at least as much as the maximum
available memory, [...]
This is more an ancient rule of thumb. You can even have a working
system without swap at all. Swap will be only
=?windows-1252?Q?Bj=F6rn_K=F6nig?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Kiffin Gish schrieb:
I just upgraded my laptop from 512MB to 1024MB memory.
It is said that the /swap partition has to be at least as much as
the maximum available memory, [...]
This is more an ancient rule of thumb. You can
the whole of the
drive. Can I shrink the mirror partition and have two swap partitions,
or if that is not possible, how would I go about creating a mirrored
swap partition?
Your swap partition ought to be mirrored already. From a similar system:
0-11:01 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ swapinfo
Device
I shrink the mirror partition and have two swap partitions,
or if that is not possible, how would I go about creating a mirrored
swap partition?
# bsdlabel /dev/mirror/gm0s1
# /dev/mirror/gm0s1:
8 partitions:
#size offsetfstype [fsize bsize bps/cpg]
a: 52428804.2BSD
Hi list,
I owned 2 boxes of FreeBSD 4.x and just noticed that the output
of command swapinfo are strange coz there are two lines of swap
entry like below. What's wrong with my 2nd boxes and how do I do
with this ?
--- snip from the 1st box ---
Device 1K-blocks UsedAvail Capacity
On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 05:23:38PM +0700, Supote Leelasupphakorn wrote:
Hi list,
I owned 2 boxes of FreeBSD 4.x and just noticed that the output
of command swapinfo are strange coz there are two lines of swap
entry like below. What's wrong with my 2nd boxes and how do I do
with this ?
PROTECTED]
CC: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: what's wrong with my swap partition ?
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 11:21:22 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: from MC6-F35.hotmail.com ([65.54.252.171]) by imc1-s34.hotmail.com
with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Thu, 27 Jan 2005 11:22:18 -0800
On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 10:27:42AM +0700, Supote Leelasupphakorn wrote:
Hi list,
If so, what do I do next coz there is no command swapoff
in such box. It's 4.10-RELEASE. But I'm pretty sure that I've
never run command swapon maually or I miss something.
Does it persist after rebooting?
From: Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Supote Leelasupphakorn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: what's wrong with my swap partition ?
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 19:44:53 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org ([69.199.47.57
Simon Burke wrote:
After a while of using 5.3RELEASE, i have noticed a small problem, my
swap partition isnt getting used. Well its not a small problem
considering that i have only 256mb ram on this machine.
boredom# swapctl -l
Device: 1024-blocks Used:
/dev/ad0s1b 48211256
Hiya,
After a while of using 5.3RELEASE, i have noticed a small problem, my
swap partition isnt getting used. Well its not a small problem
considering that i have only 256mb ram on this machine.
boredom# swapctl -l
Device: 1024-blocks Used:
/dev/ad0s1b 48211256
this i
On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 09:22:23 -0600, Kevin D. Kinsey, DaleCo, S.P.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon Burke wrote:
Hiya,
After a while of using 5.3RELEASE, i have noticed a small problem, my
swap partition isnt getting used. Well its not a small problem
considering that i have only 256mb
Simon Burke wrote:
Hiya,
After a while of using 5.3RELEASE, i have noticed a small problem, my
swap partition isnt getting used. Well its not a small problem
considering that i have only 256mb ram on this machine.
boredom# swapctl -l
Device: 1024-blocks Used:
/dev/ad0s1b 482112
I have a freebsd 5.3 system that ocassionally panics on shutdown so I
thought it might be good to get a core dump of it. Since I don't have a
partition decidated for that, I thought I might be able to use my swap
partition for it since it's twice the size of my ram and that it's useless
Loren M. Lang writes:
Looking through the system startup scripts I discovered that the
system runs a program called savecore that save a core dump to a
file in /var/crash from a previous crash. The problem is that
this is run after swap has been turned on.
True.
is true. What about the swap
partition? Is it simply bypassed, or does one need to do something to
create an encrypted swap partition?
regards,
Robert
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 10:46:35 +0100
Nagilum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The partition itself is encrypted so it doesn't matter whether the
partition contains a regular filesystem, swapfs or is used as database
storage device. It's encrypted one layer below.
Kind regards,
Alex.
Thanks Alex,
.
No cleartext ever touches the hard drive's platter.
But I wonder if that last sentence is true. What about the swap
partition? Is it simply bypassed, or does one need to do something to
create an encrypted swap partition?
regards,
Robert
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED
Hello.
I've got a 4.10 server which sometimes reboots itself, so I'd like it to
create crash dumps for me to analize, but, after an upgrade, no swap
partition is big enough to hold its entire RAM. So I tought I could join
two of them with vinum...
Any hint?
Any tutorial?
Any reason this would
Hi all, I'm creating a Knoppix-like FreeBSD release (live filesystem, runs
from CD) with 4.9 sources. I'm almost done, but I don't know what to do with
swap. I read somewhere that I must have a swap partition in my /etc/fstab,
can't this requirement be overridden?
And can I create a vn0 device
On Tuesday 11 November 2003 00:12, Daniela wrote:
Hi all, I'm creating a Knoppix-like FreeBSD release (live filesystem, runs
from CD) with 4.9 sources. I'm almost done, but I don't know what to do
with swap. I read somewhere that I must have a swap partition in my
/etc/fstab, can't
Can I install FreeBSD without swap space or I can add swapfile later?
The goal is to make installation process easy.
Thank.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body of the message
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 07:21:37AM -0800, Krissada Jindanupajit (FreeBSD-question)
wrote:
Can I install FreeBSD without swap space or I can add swapfile later?
The goal is to make installation process easy.
It's possible to install without a dedicated swap partition so long as
you have
81 matches
Mail list logo
