From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 10:19:45 -0600 Message-Id: <200106061619.f56GJjw15740@vindaloo.ras.ucalgary.ca> From: Richard Gooch Subject: Re: Requirement: swap = RAM x 2.5 ?? In-Reply-To: <3B1E572B.1CEEF41B@mandrakesoft.com> References: <3B1D5ADE.7FA50CD0@illusionary.com> <991815578.30689.1.camel@nomade> <20010606095431.C15199@dev.sportingbet.com> <0106061316300A.00553@starship> <200106061528.f56FSKa14465@vindaloo.ras.ucalgary.ca> <000701c0ee9f$515fd6a0$3303a8c0@einstein> <3B1E52FC.C17C921F@mandrakesoft.com> <200106061612.f56GCbA14901@vindaloo.ras.ucalgary.ca> <3B1E572B.1CEEF41B@mandrakesoft.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Jeff Garzik Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Christian =?iso-8859-1?Q?Borntr=E4ger?= , Derek Glidden List-ID: Jeff Garzik writes: > Richard Gooch wrote: > > > > Jeff Garzik writes: > > > > > > I'm sorry but this is a regression, plain and simple. > > > > > > Previous versons of Linux have worked great on diskless workstations > > > with NO swap. > > > > > > Swap is "extra space to be used if we have it" and nothing else. > > > > Sure. But Linux still works without swap. It's just that if you *do* > > have swap, it works best with 2* RAM. > > Yes, but that's not the point of the discussion. Currently 2*RAM is > more of a requirement than a recommendation. Um, do you mean "2*RAM is required, always", or "2*RAM or more swap is required if swap != 0"? Regards, Richard.... Permanent: rgooch@atnf.csiro.au Current: rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/