Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 18:41:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 18:40:56 -0400 Received: from perninha.conectiva.com.br ([200.250.58.156]:10509 "HELO perninha.conectiva.com.br") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 18:40:44 -0400 Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 19:40:38 -0300 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: To: Hugh Dickins Cc: LA Walsh , Subject: Re: 2.4 and 2GB swap partition limit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, Hugh Dickins wrote: > On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, Rik van Riel wrote: > > On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, LA Walsh 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. True, agreed. Rik -- Linux MM bugzilla: http://linux-mm.org/bugzilla.shtml Virtual memory is like a game you can't win; However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose... http://www.surriel.com/ http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ - 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/