On Wed, 2003-08-13 at 06:08, Rob Weir wrote: > On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 02:03:26PM -0700, Mark Ferlatte wrote: > > J. Zidar said on Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 10:49:21PM +0200: > > > I see. I'm pretty new to Debian and all. I've read that a swap partition is > > A swap partition is "better", in that it's a bit faster than a swap file. > > However, it's arguable if it matters for you (ie, it depends entirely on the > > load of the system in question). > > Just as a point of interest, swap files are effectively as fast as swap > partitions in 2.5/2.6. Reason being they now use the same mechanism to be accessed. Also, if you are using LVM Like I do: knight:~# swapon -s Filename Type Size Used Priority /dev/rootvg/swap00lv partition 1048568 3140 -1 /dev/rootvg/swap01lv partition 1048568 0 -2 Kinda makes no-sense to worry about it. -- greg, greg@gregfolkert.net REMEMBER ED CURRY! http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry Your legs are like threads of cotton, though much thicker, and filled with weevils.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part