Nemo - earth native
nemo at cheeky.house.cx
Sat Feb 15 01:33:50 EST 2003
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 05:53:52AM -0800, Gary Woodman did utter:
> > I've a quick query about swap sizes.
> > I'm running a file server, 128mb RAM. What size of swap partition
> > would be appropriate?
> > Red Hat "Reccomends" about 2x you RAM is best.
> That's a good rule of thumb... but it depends on your workload. If
> you're just serving up files and printers and so on, it's probably
My opinion is that this rule of thumb was more appropriate back when
32meg was common and 64 was WOW. Dispite the advancement of common memory
hogging apps (gnome, kde, mozilla, etc), I think that for most people,
CPU and memory specs have outpaced them...
On my desktop, dispite running X twice (2 users on the system
simultaneously), and thus galeon twice, and a few other things... I'm
rarely touching swap from 512meg ram... my rule of thumb is now 1x ram.
Back to the original poster... 128meg ram... file server... it might
depend on how hard the fileserver will be serving, and maybe via what
protocols... the somewhere between the 1x and 2x rule should be more
(I just checked my fileserver at home - which has a 4gig /home mounted
from it via nfs (it also shares this via samba), and is probably used
most heavily when I load 12meg mailboxes in mutt, or play ogg files... has
only 32meg of ram, 70meg or so of swap...
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 29856 29016 840 6120 2400 20476
-/+ buffers/cache: 6140 23716
Swap: 77388 9668 67720
Doesn't look like the swap is really being used much. (hmm, uptime hits
100days in a few hours too. neat.)
Of course, if I really gave it a workload...
/ "I only know as much about myself \ / === DISCLAIMER === \
-- as my mind can work out under it's -- -- Use of advanced messaging --
-- current conditions" --Z.Beeblebrox -- -- technology does not imply --
-- -- -- an endorsement of western --
\ http://www.nut.house.cx/~nemo/ / \ industrial civilization /
More information about the linux