Re: [OT] Re: What would I do without partimage?
On Thursday 15 December 2005 11:43 am, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 11:20:50AM -0500, Joseph H. Fry wrote:
> > I dream of the day that windows will use swap partition instead of a
> > swap file.... sure it made sense to have a swap file that could adjust
> > on the fly when drives were small... but with most machines having
> > 40GB + these days I can afford to dedicate a pretty significant
> > portion to a swap partition and not need it to resize itself
> In win95 you could specify a fixed filesize for the swap file, and
> dedicate a partition to just that file if you so wished. I imagine
> things are much the same now.
> By contrast, on my work desktop I forgot to create a swap partition
> so I use a swap-file, when necessary.
That's true... however using symantec ghost, or MS's deployment tools to clone
a machine configured as you suggest results in the swap file being placed the
destination machine's c: in most circumstances. There are ways around it,
but they are far more complicated than they should be.
If you had swap partitions, then the windows kernel could simply scan the
available partitions for valid swap partitions and activate them at boot.
This would allow you to have multiple windows installations that share the
same swap space, would make backup and cloning tools easier, and allow MS to
develop an optimized file system for swap... though I understand that swap
files are only minimally affected by the filesystem they run on.
I suppose it's not a major issue... however I do like the swap partition idea
that -nix uses.