On Thursday 21 July 2011 19:19:07 Michael Orlitzky did opine thusly: > On 07/21/2011 04:49 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: > > On Thursday 21 July 2011 10:27:58 Grant did opine thusly: > >>>> Thanks Paul. I'm leaning toward leaving swap disabled. > >>>> So > >>>> I'm sure I have the concept right, is adding a 1GB swap > >>>> partition functionally identical to adding 1GB RAM with > >>>> regard to the potential for out-of-memory conditions? > >>> > >>> Yep. > >> > >> It sounds like adding physical RAM is better than enabling > >> swap in every way. I'll stay in the anti-swap camp. > > > > To throw a spanner in my own works: > > > > Some kernels *really* want at least some swap, even if it's just > > a little bit. IIRC it fits the role of a bit of wiggle room for > > when RAM is full. > > I was waiting for this =) > > Alan's previous advice (basically, everything should fit in RAM > these days) is only true in a world where the VM doesn't > occasionally make stupid decisions. > > In real life...
:-) You caught me out. As I was typing all these posts today I was having these haunting thoughts about RealLife .... -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
