Hi,
Samuel Thibault wrote (Tue, 8 Aug 2023 00:14:11 +0200):
> Hello,
>
> This looks reasonable, thanks!
Now pushed to git.
thanks
> Samuel
>
> Holger Wansing, le mar. 08 août 2023 00:06:14 +0200, a ecrit:
> > Hi again,
> >
> > Samuel Thibault wrote (Sun, 6 Aug 2023 14:32:22
> > +0200):
> > > Holger Wansing, le sam. 05 août 2023 20:46:27 +0200, a ecrit:
> > > > Now looking in the doc source, I see that the "780MB" value from above
> > > > is
> > > > architecture-dependent too.
> > >
> > > Ah, yes, that's part of the lowmem testing.
> > >
> > > > While 780MB seems realistic for amd64 to me, I wonder if the other
> > > > values can
> > > > be up-to-date:
> > > >
> > > > amd64:minimum_memory=780
> > > > arm64:minimum_memory=260
> > > > armel:minimum_memory=80
> > > > armhf:minimum_memory=190
> > > > i386:minimum_memory=485
> > > > mips:minimum_memory=85
> > > > mips64el:minimum_memory=345
> > > > mipsel:minimum_memory=170
> > > > ppc64el:minimum_memory=64
> > > > s390x:minimum_memory=44
> > > >
> > > > In the most eye-catching case of s390x, my proposal would mean, to
> > > > change
> > > > the value in the guide from 44 to 512MB !
> > > > That leads to the question, if the new situation after my changing
> > > > would be
> > > > wrong, or if the doc was wrong in the past?
> > >
> > > The doc probably just ended up wrong by just not getting updated,
> > > because we don't have people who both care about updating them, and have
> > > access to the hardware or know the qemu tricks to test all archs.
> > >
> > > I see that in the lowmem package,
> > > bbb4ed4c4da20d585cf30ceba9f0987173d3ac70 raised the default levels from
> > > 32MB/64MB to 120MB/155MB, that being the minimum numbers that were
> > > actually seen to work on at least some arch.
> >
> > Ok, I have now included those changes into my patch, to get the numbers
> > up-to-date for all archs.
> >
> > That is:
> >
> > amd64:minimum_memory_strict=350
> > amd64:minimum_memory=780
> >
> > arm64:minimum_memory_strict=245
> > arm64:minimum_memory=260
> >
> > armel:minimum_memory_strict=140
> > armel:minimum_memory=190
> >
> > armhf:minimum_memory_strict=140
> > armhf:minimum_memory=190
> >
> > i386:minimum_memory_strict=285
> > i386:minimum_memory=485
> >
> > mips64el:minimum_memory_strict=200
> > mips64el:minimum_memory=345
> >
> > mipsel:minimum_memory_strict=160
> > mipsel:minimum_memory=170
> >
> > ppc64el:minimum_memory_strict=256
> > ppc64el:minimum_memory=500
> >
> > s390x:minimum_memory_strict=120
> > s390x:minimum_memory=155
> >
> > See patch.
> >
> >
> > > > And, if a generic value for all archs is realistic and makes sense at
> > > > all?
> > >
> > > Probably not, as seen in the values in the lowmem package.
> >
> > I think I found a reasonable solution.
> >
> > Current situation is:
> >
> > We have two sorts of numbers for RAM size:
> >
> > a) some kind of rough values, identical for all archs. These are just
> >subjective values, rounded up to the next bigger RAM modules you can buy
> >(current values can be found in
> >"Table 3.2. Recommended Minimum System Requirements" at
> >https://d-i.debian.org/manual/en.amd64/ch03s04.html )
> >These are only rough recommendations, as in "we **recommend** X MB".
> >And this chapter 3.4 also mentions, that these recommendations can well
> > be
> >underrun by the second sort of values:
> > b) these are values based on meassurements during lowmem testing. They are
> >different over the archs, and in the current text they are considered as
> >some kind of strict requirement, as in "you **need** at least X MB"
> > values.
> >--> Compare this to the "we **recommend** X MB" values from a) !
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Taking all this as a basis, I would like to propose the following:
> >
> >
> > 1. in chapter 2
> > (https://people.debian.org/~holgerw/installation-guide___improve-ram-size-values/amd64/ch02s05.html)
> >which is about hardware requirements, just mention the minimal rough
> >recommended values from a) which says something like "512MB" or "1GB",
> >corresponding to RAM modules available from your favorite hardware store.
> >
> > 2. People who want to try to go with lower values, are guided to
> >chapter 3
> > (https://people.debian.org/~holgerw/installation-guide___improve-ram-size-values/amd64/ch03s04.html),
> >where they find the values from b) based on lowmem tests, which contain
> >the "absolute minimum values", drawing the baseline that cannot be
> > underrun.
> >Note, that this page is different, depending on arch!
> >
> > 3. Move all the constraints / advanced infos like
> > - installer should automatically do memory-saving tricks on low-memory
> > systems"
> > - warning, when lowmem levels are untested for some archs
> > - note, that graphical installer images need more RAM
> > from chapter 2 to 3, where they fit better: That's not hardware (which
> > woul
