For me, the problem is not the money. If I have a system that needs
4GB of RAM, it is highly unlikely that I would ever want to be running
this machine with 8GB of swap active. However, I may be willing to
tollerate 1GB of swapping before paging to disk slowed things down
too much. This is the exact scenario I had when dealing with a large
Sun machine running Oracle & some other stuff. Oracle is dedicated large
amounts of RAM, but if I wanted to run a quick, memory intensive program
too, (and at the moment performance isn't all that big of a deal), then
using some swap is OK.
So, I too cast my vote for the 2*RAM requiment to be odious and in
need of fixing!! It could be a suggestion, but I would consider that
if not following the suggestion caused more than 10% slowdown, then
things are still broken, and optimally, it should work like the 2.2
does (in other words, I don't notice, and don't particularly care
how much swap per RAM I need, just how much total RAM-like-stuff I need.)
Thanks,
Ben
-- Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> <Ben_Greear@excite.com> President of Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com ScryMUD: http://scry.wanfear.com http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear - 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/