Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2017 12:50:26 -0700 From: Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@komquats.com> To: David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@komquats.com>, tech-lists <tech-lists@zyxst.net>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: swapfile query Message-ID: <201708191950.v7JJoQiH003322@slippy.cwsent.com> In-Reply-To: Message from David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org> of "Sat, 19 Aug 2017 18:03:01 %2B0100." <BAD32602-C6A9-4A82-B0CB-148D313B90D6@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <BAD32602-C6A9-4A82-B0CB-148D313B90D6@FreeBSD.org>, David Chisnall w rites: > On 19 Aug 2017, at 17:54, Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@komquats.com> wrote: > > > >> 3. should total swap be 1x 2x or some other multiple of RAM these days? > > > > Depends. If you're running some kind of database server or OLTP > > application. Some vendors recommend no swap whatsoever while others > > recommend some. What does your application vendor recommend? > > The main advantage of swap these days (on machines with that sort of amount o > f RAM) is to allow you to keep some file-backed memory objects in memory in p > reference to leaked (or very cold) heap memory. Memory overcommitment and the working set of each address space determines how much and what is paged out. -- Cheers, Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com> FreeBSD UNIX: <cy@FreeBSD.org> Web: http://www.FreeBSD.org The need of the many outweighs the greed of the few.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201708191950.v7JJoQiH003322>