Re: [Hampshire] Swap versus RAM size

Top Page

Reply to this message
Author: Nick Chalk
Date:  
To: hampshire
Subject: Re: [Hampshire] Swap versus RAM size
Hugo Mills <hugo@???> wrote:
> I believe that there were (that's *were*) good
> technical reasons for the 2*RAM recommendation,
> back when it was first made, related to the
> performance of the algorithms used to manage
> swap space. Those algorithms are long gone, and
> the recommendation no longer applies.


LKML reference...
Question:
http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0103.1/0878.html
Answer:
http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0103.1/0898.html

That's for the beginning of the 2.4 series.

I'm sure that, in the past, I've found a post by
Alan Cox detailing when the practice was no longer
necessary, but I can't find it tonight. The
HantsLUG archives may have it as it's something
we've discussed before, many years ago.

Nick.

--
Nick Chalk ................. once a Radio Designer
Confidence is failing to understand the problem.