On Mon, 2020-06-08 at 09:37 +0300, Konstantin Kharlamov wrote: > On Sun, 2020-06-07 at 18:19 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 12:56 PM Konstantin Kharlamov < > > > hi-angel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > enough! The moral of this story is that you can't get away with > > > only > > > ZRAM without any disk SWAP. You need disk SWAP. And if you have > > > disk > > > SWAP, ZSWAP fits more nicely there as a compressing buffer before > > > the > > > data finally spills over to disk. > > > > Your use case is intentionally overcommitting available memory and > > it > > sounds like you don't have much choice in that you (a) the workload > > you have is the workload you need to run, and (b) memory isn't > > upgradeable. > > > > You should consider testing whether swap-on-zram sized to 100% RAM > > fits your use case better. And in fact if your workload gets very > > good > > compression ratios, it can be quite reasonable to go higher than > > 100%. > > Thanks! I'll give it a try, will report back. So far everything was fine with ZRAM configured to use 100%. That said, as per discussion in another thread I have migrated today back to ZSRAM as it is more suitable when there is a on-disk SWAP as well (can't provide a link as mail archive returns 503 right now, but the discussion is called "Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: swap on zram". Turns out, the discussion of proposal is being held there, not in this thread. It is easy to mistake because the original proposal page does not have a link to discussion right now. I could as well have started a new discussion ¯\_(ツ)_/¯). _______________________________________________ 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
