Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 16:39:38 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 16:39:30 -0500 Received: from AGrenoble-101-1-3-194.abo.wanadoo.fr ([193.253.251.194]:39563 "EHLO strider.virtualdomain.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id convert rfc822-to-8bit; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 16:39:18 -0500 Message-ID: <3BF82B3C.8070303@wanadoo.fr> Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 22:42:20 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Fran=E7ois?= Cami User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.5) Gecko/20011012 X-Accept-Language: en-us, fr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: war Cc: James A Sutherland , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Swap In-Reply-To: <3BF82443.5D3E2E11@starband.net> <3BF827E1.5A2C7427@starband.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org I don't understand why it should be better with swap then... I mean, my comp seems to run so much faster (it doesn't take time to switch from one app to another, i mean) *without* swap. And I see no benefits to having an active swap, other than making my hard drive work harder. comp is PIII933/512MB on ATA100 kernel is 2.4.14 with XFS patch. Fran?ois war wrote: > Well, without the swap, everything seems to be about 100% more responsive when > I execute any task. > I see how it works now. > > James A Sutherland wrote: > > >>On Sunday 18 November 2001 9:12 pm, war wrote: >> >>>It is amazing that I could run all of that stuff, because: >>> >>>When I have swap on, and if I run all of those programs, 200-400MB of >>>swap is used. >>> >>Yep. There's a reason for that: the kernel is *ALWAYS* able to swap pages out >>to disk - even without "swap space". Disabling swapspace simply forces the >>kernel to swap out more code, since it cannot swap out any data. >> >>(This is why you can still get "disk thrashing" without any swap - in fact, >>it's more likely in this case than it is with some swap added - you are just >>forcing your binaries to take more of the swapping load instead.) >> >>So: with swapspace, the kernel swaps out a few hundred Mb of unused data, to >>make room for more code. Without it, the kernel is forced to swap out code >>pages instead. The big news here is...? >> >>James. >> > > - > 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/ > > - 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/