On Tuesday 12 February 2002 10:57 am, Jeff S Wheeler wrote:
> Alexis Bory's post earlier today made me think about swap a bit more
> than I usually do. What do other folks on this list do? Zero swap? As
> much swap as physical memory? More? Why? Can you change the swapper's
> priority, and does this help when your machine starts swapping heavily?
I run 1GB memory in almost all my new servers. I always leave some swap
space, depending on use and physical RAM (more use=more RAM=more swap). Even
with 1GB RAM, some applications, especially Oracle, still swap occasionally.
For instance, here are two of my servers right now (srv0 is Oracle server;
srv1 is Apache):
[EMAIL PROTECTED] michael]$ free
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 1036352 454400 581952 2144080 62264 52388
-/+ buffers/cache: 339748 696604
Swap: 783216 57632 725584
[EMAIL PROTECTED] michael]$ uptime
11:40am up 26 days, 23:17, 2 users, load average: 0.05, 0.03, 0.00
[EMAIL PROTECTED] michael]$ free
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 517340 266344 250996 91956 163004 23692
-/+ buffers/cache: 79648 437692
Swap: 128480 9376 119104
[EMAIL PROTECTED] michael]$ uptime
11:40am up 26 days, 23:13, 2 users, load average: 0.00, 0.05, 0.56
I have never seen it recommended practice to use no swap, although it is
becoming a very common practice these days. I think that is very dangerous,
on a server. It may be permissible on a desktop with plenty of RAM, but I
still have 1GB RAM + 1GB swap on my main desktop and 512MB RAM + 512MB swap
on this desktop (though I've never seen swap used. Just in case...)
There's my opinion, backed up by what I use daily. :-)
--
Michael Merritt O2/CO2 Conversion Specialist [o]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.miklm.com | (931) 205-1392 | AIM/MSN miklm
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Piracy is not a technological issue. It's a behavior issue."
--Steve Jobs
