>This is not necissarily true. The System-Swap routine is optimized for >arbitrary data. Gimp organizes its image-data in tiles and may perform >better in swapping those tiles, since they are a very special data-structure. Nor false. >So the swapping routines could be optimized specially for those data >(I have no idea if this is done currently) and perform better than the >systems routine. Yes, but Gimp swaps to files, while system normally swaps to partition, and if the admin is smart, to a fast disk which main (unique?) task is swapping, maybe even sharing swap among a group of disks. Kernels swap is optimized (I hope it is, otherwise... argh!), we dunno about Gimp. This is more a per-site than theoric thing, I know. In the machines I used, the best was to use kernel fuctions instead of Gimp (specially if it fills your home dir up to quota limit). Is there a way to get a valid performance measurement? >The NFS problem should be adressed. Can we detect somehow if the >configured swap-directory is a NFS-Direcrtory and issue a warning? Via mount command. I think all Unix can do that. GSR
