Re: running Linux with no swap space (but lots of RAM)
- From: Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 11:22:36 +0100
wazzujoel@xxxxxxxxx writes:
On Oct 15, 2:11 am, Rainer Weikusat <rweiku...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Shorter: As long as you have enough RAM, configuring some part of your
disk(s) for paging will have no effect (except using diskspace). If
you ever run out of RAM, not doing so will cause a malfunction with
arbitrary consequences, in-kernel memory corruption being among them.
And this is a risk with no gain.
What if your computer uses flash memory instead of a hard drive to
boot? Typically flash memory in those cheap USB2.0 memory sticks have
a limited number of writes before failure.
'Flash ROM' has always a maximum number of guaranteed erase cycles for
every sector.
Thus it is not about saving hard drive space, but about not having
to buy more memory sticks when your current one fails because of
excessive SWAP writes.
Hard drives have a MTBF, too.
This circumstance is a very good reason to not have SWAP,
There is exactly one 'very good reason to not have swap': The person
operating the computer has no clue, feels uncomfortable when the kernel
just does something he does not understand and is not willing to
accept that other people do really know better. Amusingly, these are
the people for whom the term 'idiotae' was coined by Nicolaus von Kues
in the late middle ages -- people who refuse to learn because they
rather stick to knowledge of their own fabrication because it is of
their own fabrication.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: running Linux with no swap space (but lots of RAM)
- From: wazzujoel
- Re: running Linux with no swap space (but lots of RAM)
- Prev by Date: Re: new filesystem module
- Next by Date: Re: module license taints kernel.
- Previous by thread: Re: running Linux with no swap space (but lots of RAM)
- Next by thread: Re: running Linux with no swap space (but lots of RAM)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
