On Sun, Aug 25, 2002 at 01:31:14PM -0500, Matthew S. Hallacy wrote: > On Sun, Aug 25, 2002 at 07:51:59AM -0500, Yaron wrote: > > Do the math, do you really think 64M of swap is enough on a 32M system? It depends on what is being run on the system, of course. I've got a 486 with 32 MB of RAM that never hits swap, so 64 MB is plenty. I'd say if you ever need more than 2*RAM for swap then its time to start trying to dig up some more RAM. > Is 8 gigs of swap excessive on a a 4G box? obviously it is considering > there was a 128M limit at one point, and people have had >64M of ram for > quite a while. 8 gigs of swap on a server is not necessarily excessive. Its a lot nicer to have the swap available in unexpected usage conditions (say getting slashdotted, for example), than to have the box fail because of lack of memory. > > Or you're running three or four VMWare instances. Or are doing a lot of > > video editing. Or both. While compiling stuff. > > and 128M of ram + 256M of swap is enough for this? I don't think so. No, 256 MB swap wouldn't be enough in that case. Performance would be so awful with say 1 GB of swap and 128 MB of RAM that its pretty much a moot point though. I doubt Yaron would try to run 3 or 4 VMware instances, much less do the other stuff, if he only had 128 MB of RAM. -- Jim Crumley |Twin Cities Linux Users Group Mailing List (TCLUG) crumley at fields.space.umn.edu |Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota Ruthless Debian Zealot |http://www.mn-linux.org/ Never laugh at live dragons |Dmitry's free,Jon's next? http://faircopyright.org