Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 25th Apr 2013 14:56 UTC

Thread beginning with comment 559736
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: "It's the disk I/O, stupid."
by lucas_maximus on Sat 27th Apr 2013 09:00
in reply to "RE: "It's the disk I/O, stupid.""
RE[3]: "It's the disk I/O, stupid."
by Alfman on Sat 27th Apr 2013 12:02
in reply to "RE[2]: "It's the disk I/O, stupid.""
lucas_maximus,
Swap was always a bottleneck, a modern system shouldn't really need swap given how cheap ram is. Most ram already goes towards disk caching anyways, so there's usually a very large safety margin on systems with 4GB+.
There's the "just in case" factor, but consider this: a user with 2GB ram might be recommended to have an additional 2GB swap, yet Kochise's 8GB of real ram without swap still has a safety margin 3x greater than the 2GB swap. Any set of applications that can run on the 2GB system (which is most of them) should easily be able to run with 8GB. I'd say the need for swap is practically obsolete on performance systems.
Member since:
2006-03-03
Same for Windows : having 8 GB of RAM I disabled the virtual memory : 1- faster application starting, 2- snapier computer, 3- saved 12 GB on my hard disk.
Kochise