From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 18 01:35:47 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC19516A403 for ; Fri, 18 May 2007 01:35:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from simon@optinet.com) Received: from cobra.acceleratedweb.net (cobra-gw.acceleratedweb.net [207.99.79.37]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 538FF13C43E for ; Fri, 18 May 2007 01:35:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from simon@optinet.com) Received: (qmail 13325 invoked by uid 110); 18 May 2007 01:35:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO desktop1) (simon%optinet.com@69.112.29.182) by cobra.acceleratedweb.net with SMTP; 18 May 2007 01:35:46 -0000 From: "Simon" To: "Tzu-Hua Wang" Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 21:37:55 -0400 Priority: Normal X-Mailer: PMMail 2000 Professional (2.20.2717) For Windows 2000 (5.1.2600;2) In-Reply-To: <224a745a0705171816u37935b3amfb40be7390b8d2f0@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20070518013547.538FF13C43E@mx1.freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: "freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: About the SWAP X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 01:35:47 -0000 I made a mistake, I meant to say 1x the total memory. Swap is very slow, you don't want continuous swapping on your server as this will slow things down tremendously. -Simon --Original Message Text--- From: Tzu-Hua Wang Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 09:16:39 +0800 Hi Simon, Thank you for your response. Actually, when I setuped the FreeBSD 6.2R and used the default slice configuration for my hard disk, FreeBSD suggested that the SWAP should be 4G (with 4G RAM). I had had the same suggestion when I had 2 G RAM before. Thank you for your response again. 2007/5/18, Simon : There is nothing wrong with this. The only reason for 2x swap is so you could dump kernel image should you want to debug a crash. Otherwise, if you ask me, 4GB of swap is waste of disk space, but then again, nowadays harddrives are so large that it doesn't really matter. -Simon On Fri, 18 May 2007 08:46:15 +0800, Tzu-Hua Wang wrote: >Hi, >I have 4G RAM totally. >The SWAP is now 4G now. >Is it ok? >Thanks >2007/5/18, Tim Aslat < tim@spyderweb.com.au >: >> >> In the immortal words of Tzu-Hua Wang on 05/17/07 20:27: >> > Hi, >> > I added 2G RAM to my server. Is it necessary for me to alter the size of >> > SWAP? >> > My SWAP is 4G originally. >> >> Does this mean you now have 2G or you have 2G more ram? >> >> Typically, the rule of thumb is you need at least 1Mb more swap than you >> have actual ram. Something to do with system core-dumps, or some such. >> I forget exactly what the the reason was, but it's still a good idea to >> have more swap than physical memory, even if it's only a slightly larger. >> >> Maybe it was hibernation or something like that. Must go back and read >> up on it again >> >> Cheers >> >> Tim >> >> -- >> Tim Aslat < tim@spyderweb.com.au> >> Spyderweb Consulting >> http://www.spyderweb.com.au >> Mobile: +61 0401088479 >> >_______________________________________________ >freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hardware >To unsubscribe, send any mail to " freebsd-hardware-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"