On Saturday 10 June 2006 03:21pm, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le samedi 10 juin 2006 à 14:57 -0600, Lamont R. Peterson a écrit : > > What if I decide later on that my one swap partition isn't big enough? > > I'll create a swap file or a swap LV (probably making it a lower swap > > priority) and use that until I upgrade the hard drive again. Easy. > > Which is why swap-on-lvm wins on the ease-of-use front. I think you missed the point. I'm saying *if* you *have* to change swap frequently, then there is an advantage to having swap on LVM. But, if you had read the rest of my message (I don't know either way, but you did take the quoted paragraph out of context with the next one), then you would have read me making basically the same point as this: > Now you may say normal swap is slightly faster - but nowadays if you're > swapping you've already got performance problems. swap is more a > security feature than a normal-use-feature with today's memory/disk > speed of access ratios Right. Like I said, if you're hitting swap, performance is going to suck and at that point, every little bit helps. If you find that you're always in swap, then you need to reevaluate the RAM, storage and/or activities on the machine(s) in question. A dedicated swap drive is less hassle and better performance than LVM swap, *if* you *need* that kind of swap performance. I like the way you phrased it here: "...swap is more a security feature than a normal-use-feature...", though I might replace the word "security" with "safety" or "safety net". -- Lamont R. Peterson <lamont@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Senior Instructor Guru Labs, L.C. [ http://www.GuruLabs.com/ ] GPG Key fingerprint: F98C E31A 5C4C 834A BCAB 8CB3 F980 6C97 DC0D D409
Attachment:
pgpt8nvrHieuK.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
