512 MB Ram is heaps for a terminal. Probably don't need any swap.
On 06/03/2008, Rolf-Werner Eilert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> As I'm building a new server, there is the question of the quantity of
> swap space given to the terminals.
>
> The terminals all have 512 MB RAM. Up to
jam schrieb:
> On Friday 07 March 2008 05:12:59 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> As I'm building a new server, there is the question of the quantity of
>> swap space given to the terminals.
>>
>> The terminals all have 512 MB RAM. Up to now, we have 512 MB swap. Would
>> it make sense to give them 10
On Friday 07 March 2008 05:12:59 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> As I'm building a new server, there is the question of the quantity of
> swap space given to the terminals.
>
> The terminals all have 512 MB RAM. Up to now, we have 512 MB swap. Would
> it make sense to give them 1024 MB instead, or woul
Cannot confirm this. 512 MB RAM can be too small if users are surfin'
Firefox and sites with a huge amount of graphics content. So if I switch
off ltspswap, there are crashes (not frequently but there are some). If
I switch it on, the system runs flawlessly.
Rolf
Krsnendu dasa schrieb:
> 512
Hi folks,
As I'm building a new server, there is the question of the quantity of
swap space given to the terminals.
The terminals all have 512 MB RAM. Up to now, we have 512 MB swap. Would
it make sense to give them 1024 MB instead, or would that have
side-effects like longer response times or
