It seems that in early days of 2.4.x, the total
usable VM used to be not close to sum of the
physical RAM and swap. Is this still true for
post 2.4.10 kernels?
Back in January 2001, in response to a question
about ``recommended swap for 2.4.x'', Rik van Riel
answered (quotes '>' are from the messagey by
It has. We now leave dirty pages swapcached,
which means that for certain workloads Linux
2.4 eats up much more swap space than Linux
On the other hand, if you almost never used
swap under Linux 2.2, you probably won't be
using it under 2.4 either.
> 2) Subtract the amount of RAM you have
> (believe it or not, the more RAM you have,
> the less swap you need. Imagine that).
For Linux 2.4, it may be better to substract a
bit less, because of the issue above.
If you have a very swap-intensive workload, you
may end up with 90% of your memory being
"duplicated" in swap, in which case this rule
My understanding is that this answer is not
applicable to post 2.4.10 kernels, but if so then
would the total usable VM be <physical RAM> +
<swap> - <kernel itself> - <kernel overhead that
is not proportional to the VM workload>?
Nokia 5510 looks weird sounds great.
Go to http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/nokia/ discover and win it!
The competition ends 16 th of December 2001.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Dec 15 2001 - 21:00:14 EST