hi ya mark On Sun, 9 Jan 2005, Mark Hahn wrote: > > the silly rule of 2x size of RAM == swap space came from the old days > > when memory was 10x the costs of disks or some silly cost performance > > that it made sense when grandpa was floating around > > ram is currently about $.1/MB, and disk is about $.0004/MB, > so there is still a good reason to put idle pages onto swap disks. yes.. as long as "swap(aka system thruput) speed" is not an issue and the alternative is to crash once memory options is used up :-) > > by todays ram and disk pricing ... and cpu speeds ...2x memory sorta > > goes out the door > > no. the cpu-speed argument is based on the fact that disk latencies > are improving quite slowly, compared to ram latency (which is itself > falling drastically behind cpu speeds.) the 2x memory capacity "old rule of thumb" i was referring to was if a system has 500MB of real memory, the old rule of thumb says create ( 2x 500 ) 1GB of disk swap - whether that 1GB of swap should be one partition or many spread out across the disk is another PhD paper c ya alvin - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
