Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 09 Sep 2009 11:11:42 -0400
From:      Lowell Gilbert <freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org>
To:        Peter Steele <psteele@maxiscale.com>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Using mdconfig for swap space
Message-ID:  <441vmgw3td.fsf@be-well.ilk.org>
In-Reply-To: <7B9397B189EB6E46A5EE7B4C8A4BB7CB3037EC62@MBX03.exg5.exghost.com> (Peter Steele's message of "Wed, 9 Sep 2009 09:58:09 -0500")
References:  <7B9397B189EB6E46A5EE7B4C8A4BB7CB3037EBB7@MBX03.exg5.exghost.com> <20090908235259.GB19173@gizmo.acns.msu.edu> <20090909105707.GA27941@torus.slightlystrange.org> <7B9397B189EB6E46A5EE7B4C8A4BB7CB3037EC0A@MBX03.exg5.exghost.com> <20090909165005.089ae704@suszko.eu> <7B9397B189EB6E46A5EE7B4C8A4BB7CB3037EC62@MBX03.exg5.exghost.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Steele <psteele@maxiscale.com> writes:

>>Nowadays having swap twice as RAM is not necessary. If your system
>>wasn't swapping much in the past you can safely stay with 4G in my
>>opinion... extending it to 16G would be waste of space :)
>
> I won't bore you with the details but in fact our application *does*
> require this much swap space, but not for the typical reasons. It's a
> side effect of how our application works and we thought we could make
> use of an image file for the extra swap rather than repartitioning,
> but I've read too many warnings against going this route so I've
> decided to stick with increasing the size of the swap partition.

It's easy to *try* the swap files.  Then measure the performance.  
If the behaviour is really as specific to your custom application 
as you indicate, then general advice may not apply either.

-- 
Lowell Gilbert, embedded/networking software engineer, Boston area
		http://be-well.ilk.org/~lowell/



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?441vmgw3td.fsf>