Re: Partitioning schemes for partman-auto
Anton Zinoviev <email@example.com> writes:
> On 1.III.2004 at 20:10 Falk Hueffner wrote:
> > Swap nowadays only serve to spill pages that haven't been accessed for
> > hours, or to slow down the system enough so you can kill processes
> > gone haywire; therefore, it is not performance critical and a swap
> > file will do just fine and is more flexible WRT resizing.
> I can remember the installer of Red Hat saying that the swap must be
> always at least as much as the available RAM even if there is enough
> RAM. Without swap the performance of the system would be degraded.
> Do you know if this is true?
I dimly recall there used to be a bug in older kernel releases to this
effect. I don't believe it is relevant any more. If it was, I'd
certainly consider it a kernel bug.