[linux-elitists] Performance issues with swap file vs. swap partition
Thu Nov 6 04:59:44 PST 2003
on Thu, Nov 06, 2003, Eugen Leitl (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 01:28:14PM +0100, Ragnar Hojland Espinosa wrote:
> > AFAIK, the performance difference on modern kernels is negligible.
> > That said, if you have a swap partition on a separate IDE channel or
> > SCSI disk, you won't starve the I/O bandwidth by swapping (which would
> > probabily happen if you have a swap file..)
> Speaking of more spindles, does SATA address the usual IDE problem (system
> has response hiatus (keyboard, audio) during intense IDE activity)? Sure,
> SCSI, I know, don't have the budget for that one at home. No way how I could
> pay half a TByte worth of SCSI drives.
> Is responsiveness visibly increased in general in the 2.6 kernel family (haven't run
> one yet)?
I found that applying the low-latency and preempt patches to my 2.4.22
kernel significantly improved responsiveness in my usual desktop
environment (GNOME 2.4). [Aside: thanks to kernel-package, I can
actually get this sort of thing working now. I've had terrible luck in
the past with patching the kernel. YARYSBRD]
Also, setting the low-latency kernel option in 2.6 produced a similar
> (I mean, I don't expect hard realtime from a desktop/server OS, but even in
> comparison to Darwin/OS X the usual Linux behaviour is terrible. Maybe my
> systems so far have been pathological, so I'd be very grateful for
> suggestions as how to fix them).
/me throws you to the "how to ask smart questions" weenies :-)
The IWETHEY project: http://www.iwethey.org
Collaborative Media Foundation: http://collaborativemedia.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://allium.zgp.org/pipermail/linux-elitists/attachments/20031106/c07beed5/attachment.pgp
More information about the linux-elitists