Apparently, zRam is still in the experimental (staging) phase for the Linux kernel, although it seems that Google is going to apply it in Chrome OS.
A much simpler measure for increasing performance on low memory systems, is a decrease of swappiness (or swap use): https://sites.google.com/site/easylinuxtipsproject/first-xubuntu#TOC-Decrease-the-swap-use-very-important- This has a less powerful effect than zRam, but at least it has the benefit of being straightforward and not complicating things. As said, my limited experience with zRam is positive. But I know of at least one person who reported stability issues because of zRam (they appeared after installing zRam, and disappeared after removing it). Maybe a swappiness decrease can be considered for Xubuntu instead? Regards, Pjotr. 2013/7/17 Micah Gersten <[email protected]> > On 07/17/2013 01:37 AM, Elfy wrote: > > On 16/07/13 21:18, Ali Linx (amjjawad) wrote: > > ... > >> I think it's pretty late in the cycle for a major change like this, >> > > Hmm, I'm sorry to ask too much and cause headache but, what makes you > think it is pretty late in the cycle > > The cycle started months ago. > > and what makes you think this is a major change? why to wait for the > next cycle? > > > why do it now? > > ... > > I can do this right now. Unless of course everyone else agrees with you > that it is too late for this cycle and this needs to be discussed later. > > > I'd not vote on anything that isn't presented to us with all the > information we need to make informed decisions, in the way that you have > been asked to do so. > > ... > Hmm, maybe if I explain more about how this change will help Xubuntu a > lot, will that change anything about trying out this now? since we are > still in Alpha Stage. Please, advise! > > > > I'd certainly be interested to see what we would gain from using it, but > that should be part of the proposal. > > > > The reason to do it now is that the next cycle is an LTS cycle which we > almost certainly wouldn't enable such a thing. As zram-config just adds an > upstart job, it's easy enough to pull out of the default install if it > appears to be problematic. I'd certainly like to see the proposal (unless > we can just read the lubuntu thread and start a similar discussion here). > If it's experimental, then I agree that we shouldn't be enabling it in the > default install. If it's just additional, but stable, then it's something > that can be considered. We have 1 month until feature freeze, so anything > that we think might be worthy for the LTS that we can throw in now *and > stabilize by feature freeze*, we should consider doing so to get extended > testing on it (read: an extra 6 months). > > Micah > > -- > xubuntu-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel > >
-- xubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel
