From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 29 18:34:17 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DF4720D for ; Wed, 29 May 2013 18:34:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amvandemore@gmail.com) Received: from mail-pb0-x22b.google.com (mail-pb0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::22b]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC379F69 for ; Wed, 29 May 2013 18:34:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pb0-f43.google.com with SMTP id ma3so9580640pbc.30 for ; Wed, 29 May 2013 11:34:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=0FOg0fGvR9VSw70TI2mXNVZc+6dP8MFrh+Ew17cKvyM=; b=Rpb8eQzeuM9SHduo3k2dEJLJ/pv4O0LtFf/7uTjf9PrFvpyu93USb+iH+E+cmdCBT/ piqGRipj8pd8dkI7GkJAERB2/5eWebr0PxLHWnEpn6wLuD+qzYNdmmy7rPTFhSW2i1NS oG+7pwJcVdguVbkULvIljq2kmSgpNIBVAI57Wsi3HIoqgrlmP/Y+5dSX3W0EWaGbLxqu atwh190XPSKiQ1TpGpJeNsSMEGncaEcE13d+Jv6bwQ8YtpRaVnOPhryOF0v6hqfnxTLc u/Go9g1a5QVA/JW0AsZ8iOqJpcAtDukGh0mwvLGmOm62BtcwsBr/1OHbRxO9zgAD3zz1 QdIA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.68.228.195 with SMTP id sk3mr4138963pbc.103.1369852456167; Wed, 29 May 2013 11:34:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.70.31.195 with HTTP; Wed, 29 May 2013 11:34:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1369558712.96152.YahooMailNeo@web165006.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <20130526160906.4e379016@X220.ovitrap.com> <20130526113235.f5dbe768.freebsd@edvax.de> Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 13:34:16 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: "swap" partition leads to instability? From: Adam Vande More To: Warren Block Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 29 May 2013 18:46:45 +0000 Cc: Polytropon , Erich Dollansky , Michael Sierchio , "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" , "M. V." X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 18:34:17 -0000 On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Warren Block wrote: > And you don't think the presence of TRIM--where the SSD can actually know > which blocks are no longer in use--is worthwhile? As a whole, TRIM is worthwhile. However when an SSD is overprovisioned it provides a lot of benefits. TRIM-less swap in this case doesn't. The PE rate of the worst MLC SSD's at this point is @3000 AFAIK. Given those figures and average desktop swap rate at my estimation, prioritizing write endurance on an SSD is not beneficial(especially with a SanForce). If you are swapping continuously something like ZeusRAM may be required. There are probably other solutions available as well as other 3rd party ones. If you are swapping a lot, the best case is usually to add RAM. -- Adam Vande More