On Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 11:40:40PM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > > An interesting option (though with less-than-stellar performance
> > > characteristics) would be a dynamically expanding swapfile. If you're
> > > going to be hit with swap penalties, it may be useful to not have to
> > > pre-reserve something you only hit once in a great while.
> > This makes amazingly little sense since you'd still need to
> > pre-reserve the disk space the swapfile grows into.
> It makes roughly the same sense as over-committing memory.
> Both are useful, both are unreliable.
And we have the one, so we should also implement the other one to
be totally unreliable.
*gd&r*
Ingo Oeser
--
10.+11.03.2001 - 3. Chemnitzer LinuxTag <http://www.tu-chemnitz.de/linux/tag>
<<<<<<<<<<<< been there and had much fun >>>>>>>>>>>>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
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 : Mon Apr 30 2001 - 21:00:22 EST