On Saturday, January 25, 2020 2:52:05 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote: > Question and (pre)proposal: > Can Fedora converge on a single swap-on-ZRAM implementation, and if > so, which one? Fedora Workstation WG wants to move to swap-on-ZRAM by > default in Fedora 33, and the working group needs to pick something > soon. > > I think it should be zram-generator. It's the most lightweight, can be > included by default distro wide. Without a configuration file, it > doesn't run. Thus, each edition/spin, and even the install > environment, can have their own configuration file, to setup it up > however they want, or not set it up. > > I also suspect it's the only one that could be upstreamed to systemd > proper, and just included like many other generators. > > > Background story and references: > Fedora IoT enables swap-on-ZRAM by default for a long time, and have > no issues. Fedora Workstation WG has been evaluating it for some time, > and wants to enable it by default in Fedora 33. Prior discussions [1] > (Details will be in a future feature proposal.) > > Swap is a basic function, and swap-on-ZRAM is an optimization of a > basic function. Basic things should be understandable by users, > without having different configuration files, and systemd units to > look for, depending on what edition/spin they use, or whether they're > booting installation media, or an installed system. It's confusing. > And they don't co-exist gracefully. > > There are three implementations in Fedora [2]. Installation media > (DVD, netinstall, Live) use Anaconda's when the install media is > booted; Live installations include it, but it's disabled. Fedora IoT > has its own variant enabled by default, similar in design and function > to Anaconda's, but differently named systemd unit, configuration file, > and bash scripts used by the systemd unit. There's nothing wrong with > these, but in my estimation they have no chance of being upstreamed to > systemd proper. > > And there's zram-generator. It works much like any other of the basic > generators for this sort of thing: the gpt-auto-generator, the > fstab-generator, and the cryptsetup-generator. I'm not sure who would > argue we need multiple implementations of these things, with separate > configuration files, in the same distribution. > > [1] > https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/98 > https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/120 > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > message/XUZLHJ5O32OX24LG44R7UZ2TMN6NY47N/ > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/iot@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/t > hread/OPCNQE547MED7CKFWCRYXS35ZOTJYKWU/ > > [2] > zram-generator-0.1.2-1.fc32.x86_64 > https://github.com/systemd/zram-generator > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-zram-generator > > zram-0.4-1.fc31.noarch > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/zram > Provides zram-swap.service > > anaconda-32.20-1.fc32.x86_64 > https://github.com/rhinstaller/anaconda > Provides zram.service Using swap on zram disables the ability to hibernate, making it a non-starter for many users. If this is going to be thrown into anything, the user needs to be asked whether they want it or not in the installer, otherwise you're just taking away features. -- John M. Harris, Jr. Splentity _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
