On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 12:23:42PM -0800, David Guntner wrote: > Hi all, > > While still trying to figure out why Thunderbird isn't working so well > with Dovecot, I figured I'd move onto another mystery; thought I'd seek > out some opinions here. :-) > > When setting up Linux systems, I've always set up a separate swap > partition. I was reading a few days ago that apparently there's a nifty > way to do like Windows does (that alone should probably be good enough > reason to *not* do it... :-) ) and set up a swap *file* instead. > > So, anyone? Pros & cons? Is there any reason to prefer one over the other? Performance-wise? There's no difference (http://serverfault.com/questions/25653/swap-partition-vs-file-for-performance#25708). Flexibility-wise? Well, if you put your swap partition on LVM, then you can move it around and extend it just as easily as you could a file. Perhaps the only advantage a partition has is that you can fairly easily ensure it's at the fast end of your disk (that said, balance up how long the head's going to be there, with how long it takes to get there). > > One thing to know about up front - my new Debian setup is on my home > server. It runs 24/7 and I *never* suspend/hibernate it. So since it > never has to resume from a swap partition, that particular item is moot. :-) > > So, what is the common "best practice" (more-or-less) consensus on the > subject these days? A partition is probably the most common.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature