--MnLPg7ZWsaic7Fhd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

roberto@redix.it wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 02:21:10PM +0100, roberto@redix.it wrote:
> >> and, like this case where RAM > SWAP, what about do not using swap at
> >> all (disabling swap, for example)?

> > This should work too.

It should but it depends on your carma. I've tried it with 256MB RAM. If
you're using system as desktop machine or need even more memory than
such machines, just forget it. It's not so funny when the kernel kills your
X server. The rule (swap space =3D=3D 2 * RAM) is of course very outdated.
That was true when the OS reserved a page in swap for every physical page.
Though, on a machine which serves dozens of users at the same time or
needs a lot of virtual memory due to certain software, you'll usually need
much more than 2*RAM swap space (or rather more RAM).
=20
> http://www.ccrc.wustl.edu/pub/chuck/tech/uvm/

The presented information there is very old.

--=20
Christian

--MnLPg7ZWsaic7Fhd
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFAHHal0KQix3oyIMcRAlvxAJ9b0sL9EwybyfZavP2W+OqrNNvHOwCbBKNl
0xx3qubq5BQSYjpO63LLSww=
=QZMq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--MnLPg7ZWsaic7Fhd--