On Sun, 26 May 2013 18:48:18 -0500
Adam Vande More wrote:
> Um, that is wrong. It is in fact the basically the point of TRIM.
> And SSD's typically use the best form of wear leveling and it's
> usually advisable to leave a bit of the drive unpartitioned/unused to
> ensure the wear leveling works
RW googlemail.com> writes:
>
> On Sun, 26 May 2013 12:36:42 + (UTC)
> jb wrote:
>
> > But, swapping is also a symptom, not a problem.
> > It is never a good idea to let it get to that point.
>
> No, there are thing that are better on disk than in memory. The most
> common example is tmpfs.
RW googlemail.com> writes:
> ...
> > Yes, there is some confusion about the diff, if any, between paging
> > and swapping.
> >
> > Paging - copying or moving pages between physical memory (RAM) and
> > secondary storage (e.g. hard disk), in both directions.
> > Swapping - nowdays is synonymous
On Wed, 29 May 2013 19:52:02 + (UTC)
jb wrote:
> RW googlemail.com> writes:
>
> >
> > BTW you mean paging, or swap use, rather that swapping. Linux
> > supports only paging, so it can be taken as read that swapping
> > means paging, but FreeBSD supports both.
>
> Yes, there is some confus
On May 29, 2013, at 3:52 PM, jb wrote:
> Yes, there is some confusion about the diff, if any, between paging and
> swapping.
>
> Paging - copying or moving pages between physical memory (RAM) and secondary
> storage (e.g. hard disk), in both directions.
> Swapping - nowdays is synonymous with
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 2:52 PM, jb wrote:
> Well, Linux utilizes swap space as part of virtual memory.
As does every other Unix.
--
Adam Vande More
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-que
RW googlemail.com> writes:
>
> On Sun, 26 May 2013 12:36:42 + (UTC)
> jb wrote:
>
> > But, swapping is also a symptom, not a problem.
> > It is never a good idea to let it get to that point.
>
> No, there are thing that are better on disk than in memory. The most
> common example is tmpfs.
PS -- Moderating questions@ is just awful. I'm disappointed.
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Adam Vande More wrote:
> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Warren Block wrote:
>> And you don't think the presence of TRIM--where the SSD can actually know
>> which blocks are no longer in use--is worth
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Warren Block wrote:
> And you don't think the presence of TRIM--where the SSD can actually know
> which blocks are no longer in use--is worthwhile?
As a whole, TRIM is worthwhile. However when an SSD is
overprovisioned it provides a lot of benefits. TRIM-less sw
On Wed, 29 May 2013, Michael Sierchio wrote:
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Adam Vande More wrote:
Normal dynamic wear leveling on a modern SSD will be better than
imposing an FS- backed swap for 4GB partion occupying a small fraction
of total drive space.
And you don't think the presence
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Adam Vande More wrote:
>
> Normal dynamic wear leveling on a modern SSD will be better than
> imposing an FS- backed swap for 4GB partion occupying a small fraction
> of total drive space.
>
>
Quite so.
- M
___
freebsd-
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 6:19 AM, jb wrote:
> - overcommitment of memory (a bluff asking to be punished by OOM killer)
No self respecting Unix has an OOM by default.
> - OOM killer
Are you suggesting FreeBSD does this crap?
> Besides, they allow sloppy/dangerous programming.
Yup, in the kernel
On Wed, 29 May 2013 13:57:22 +0200
Fred Morcos wrote:
> Linux has a sysctl variable vm.swappiness which you can set to 0 or 1
> out of 100. Not sure how to achieve the same on FreeBSD, maybe one or
> more combinations of the following?
You'll probably make things worse.
> vm.stats.vm.v_swappgso
On Sun, 26 May 2013 12:36:42 + (UTC)
jb wrote:
> But, swapping is also a symptom, not a problem.
> It is never a good idea to let it get to that point.
No, there are thing that are better on disk than in memory. The most
common example is tmpfs. It's much better that files left on tmpfs can
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 1:19 PM, jb wrote:
> Fred Morcos gmail.com> writes:
>
> > ..
> > The improvement effect can be
> > noticed on large inputs. These algorithms will most probably perform
> quite
> > badly on small inputs.
>
> I think your concern has been addressed in review of various algo
Fred Morcos gmail.com> writes:
> ..
> The improvement effect can be
> noticed on large inputs. These algorithms will most probably perform quite
> badly on small inputs.
I think your concern has been addressed in review of various algos where base
case identification helped to avoid overhead co
On 26. mai 2013, at 10:58, "M. V." wrote:
> But recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert that I shouldn't have swap
> partition for my server, and having swap partition could make my server
> unstable
Any chance this could be a simple misunderstanding?
That he objected to the thought of the serv
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:42 PM, jb wrote:
> Follow up comment.
>
> It has been pointed out to me that there is Varnish software taking
> advantage
> of system VMM and swap space.
>
> Well, there are cache-oblivious algorithms that perform as well, and so
> they
> make the above (disk access mode
Follow up comment.
It has been pointed out to me that there is Varnish software taking advantage
of system VMM and swap space.
Well, there are cache-oblivious algorithms that perform as well, and so they
make the above (disk access model; cache-aware model) unnecessary
(obsolete ?) and are super
jb gmail.com> writes:
> M. V. yahoo.com> writes:
>> recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert that I shouldn't have
>> swap partition for my server, and having swap partition could
>> make my server unstable.
> I think your FB expert was up to something. I bet he spoke out
> of experience.
>
>
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Warren Block wrote:
> Which part?
This part: "Another problem with SSDs is that they can have
difficulty with wear leveling." Do as I suggested and you'll get
maximum life from the drive even with swap present. Even absent of
best practices, SSD's in general do
On Sun, 26 May 2013, Adam Vande More wrote:
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 6:32 PM, Warren Block wrote:
Another problem with SSDs is that they can have difficulty with wear
leveling. This is even worse with swap because there is no way to use TRIM
to tell the SSD about blocks that have been freed.
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 6:32 PM, Warren Block wrote:
> Another problem with SSDs is that they can have difficulty with wear
> leveling. This is even worse with swap because there is no way to use TRIM
> to tell the SSD about blocks that have been freed.
Um, that is wrong. It is in fact the bas
On Sun, 26 May 2013, Polytropon wrote:
On Sun, 26 May 2013 16:09:06 +0700, Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, 26 May 2013 01:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
"M. V." wrote:
I have a 24/7 network server/gateway with FreeBSD-8.2 on a SSD drive.
it's partitioned as normal (/ , /tmp, /var , /usr and swap) for
The Intel SLC mSATA drives I use in embedded devices don't support TRIM,
but - it doesn't seem to matter. Actually, I'm confident that just using
bare partitions for swap is fine, and I haven't had any of the trouble I
witnessed with MLC devices. The difference is that the size is limited to
unde
M. V. yahoo.com> writes:
>
> hi everyone,
>
> I have a 24/7 network server/gateway with FreeBSD-8.2 on a SSD drive. it's
partitioned as normal (/ , /tmp,
> /var , /usr and swap) for a long time now. But recently I heard from a
FreeBSD expert that I shouldn't have
> swap partition for my server,
On 26/05/2013 09:58, M. V. wrote:
> hi everyone,
>
> I have a 24/7 network server/gateway with FreeBSD-8.2 on a SSD drive. it's
> partitioned as normal (/ , /tmp, /var , /usr and swap) for a long time now.
> But recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert that I shouldn't have swap
> partition for m
Hi,
sorry for my English. Here is what I wanted to say.
On Sun, 26 May 2013 16:09:06 +0700
Erich Dollansky wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, 26 May 2013 01:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
> "M. V." wrote:
>
> > I have a 24/7 network server/gateway with FreeBSD-8.2 on a SSD
> > drive. it's partitioned as normal (/
On Sun, 26 May 2013 01:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
"M. V." wrote:
> hi everyone,
>
> I have a 24/7 network server/gateway with FreeBSD-8.2 on a SSD drive. it's
> partitioned as normal (/ , /tmp, /var , /usr and swap) for a long time now.
> But recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert that I shouldn't have
On Sun, 26 May 2013 16:09:06 +0700, Erich Dollansky wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, 26 May 2013 01:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
> "M. V." wrote:
>
> > I have a 24/7 network server/gateway with FreeBSD-8.2 on a SSD drive.
> > it's partitioned as normal (/ , /tmp, /var , /usr and swap) for a
> > long time now. But
Hi,
On Sun, 26 May 2013 01:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
"M. V." wrote:
> I have a 24/7 network server/gateway with FreeBSD-8.2 on a SSD drive.
> it's partitioned as normal (/ , /tmp, /var , /usr and swap) for a
> long time now. But recently I heard from a FreeBSD expert that I
> shouldn't have swap partiti
Jerry McAllister writes:
> This could be a problem. I think using the '*' for size will
> cause it to use the whole remaining space for that partition.
> Even though it logically starts at 2097152, it might not come out
> even on a good boundary or something like that. It really seems to
> like
On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 11:28:13AM -0600, Martin McCormick wrote:
> I figured out a way to install swap as the only
> fixed-sized partition such that whatever is left is marked as
> BSD (165) but I am not sure if this is a workable solution so I
> am asking for suggestions.
>
> If I s
I figured out a way to install swap as the only
fixed-sized partition such that whatever is left is marked as
BSD (165) but I am not sure if this is a workable solution so I
am asking for suggestions.
If I set up the disk label reference file as follows:
# /dev/ad0s1:
8 partitions
When referring to the slices in a FreeBSD partition,
which is correct, ad0s1a or ad0s1-1?
One of the problems in setting up install.cfg is that I
am not sure if it is not configuring the disk because the
designations are wrong or if I am telling fdisk to do something
that it can't
Bob Johnson writes:
> The only thing that looks out of place is that you have defined
> ad0s1-2 before ad0s1-1. I've never tested it, but perhaps this is
> causing it to get confused when calculating the disk layout? In other
> words, perhaps you should use
>
> #1G swap followed by / on rest of di
The only thing that looks out of place is that you have defined
ad0s1-2 before ad0s1-1. I've never tested it, but perhaps this is
causing it to get confused when calculating the disk layout? In other
words, perhaps you should use
#1G swap followed by / on rest of disk.
#
ad0s1-1=swap 2097152
#A
Jerry McAllister writes:
> But, note that you are talking only a small percentage
> of your Hd space, so it is hardly worth quibbling about.
In most places, disk space is dirt cheap. If you're really
worried, find a 5-10 gbyte drive used and make it a dedicated swap
disk.
On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 05:13:28PM -0800, Eugen Udma wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have FreeBSD installed on my desktop, with 2 GB of RAM and
> 4 GB swap partition and this swap partition is very seldom
> touched by the system and then only 2-3% used.
>
> I want to install FreeBSD on a laptop with 4 GB
Eugen Udma wrote:
Hello,
I have FreeBSD installed on my desktop, with 2 GB of RAM and
4 GB swap partition and this swap partition is very seldom
touched by the system and then only 2-3% used.
I want to install FreeBSD on a laptop with 4 GB of RAM and a
hard disk of 100 GB. Should I w
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 17:13:28 -0800 (PST)
Eugen Udma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I want to install FreeBSD on a laptop with 4 GB of RAM and a
> hard disk of 100 GB. Should I waste 8 GB for a swap partition,
> as it is recommended in the handbook?
Probably not. The twice the ram rule is for people
Simon Burke wrote:
After a while of using 5.3RELEASE, i have noticed a small problem, my
swap partition isnt getting used. Well its not a small problem
considering that i have only 256mb ram on this machine.
boredom# swapctl -l
Device: 1024-blocks Used:
/dev/ad0s1b 48211256
t
On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 09:22:23 -0600, Kevin D. Kinsey, DaleCo, S.P.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Simon Burke wrote:
>
>
>
> >Hiya,
> >
> >After a while of using 5.3RELEASE, i have noticed a small problem, my
> >swap partition isnt getting used. Well its not a small problem
> >considering that i ha
Simon Burke wrote:
Hiya,
After a while of using 5.3RELEASE, i have noticed a small problem, my
swap partition isnt getting used. Well its not a small problem
considering that i have only 256mb ram on this machine.
boredom# swapctl -l
Device: 1024-blocks Used:
/dev/ad0s1b 482112
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 10:46:35 +0100
Nagilum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The partition itself is encrypted so it doesn't matter whether the
> partition contains a regular filesystem, swapfs or is used as database
>
> storage device. It's encrypted one layer below.
> Kind regards,
> Alex.
Thanks
The partition itself is encrypted so it doesn't matter whether the
partition contains a regular filesystem, swapfs or is used as database
storage device. It's encrypted one layer below.
Kind regards,
Alex.
Robert Storey wrote:
Dear All,
I've succeeded in creating an encrypted partition using gbd
46 matches
Mail list logo
