partman, recipes, sizing, swap, and all the things

Christian Ehrhardt christian.ehrhardt at canonical.com
Thu Nov 3 08:37:57 UTC 2016


On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:52 AM, Dimitri John Ledkov <xnox at ubuntu.com>
wrote:

> As far as I understand, swap performance is better on swap formatted
> lvm volume, than a swapfile on a filesystem on an lvm volume.
>

That is only true for the initial search for swap slots, that is when
memory is tight the first time.
After the pages have a backing store assigned it should be the same
code&speed for both.
Overall I'd say the speed argument shouldn't be important here.

E.g. 1GB swapfile, but no more than 5% of disk space is simple enough. no?
>

Since it can be overwritten anyway I personally like that one a lot.

I'd expect that almost all setups that will be "not happy" with this simple
approach like the "temporary ballooning of memory requirements" you
mentioned e.g. in a virtualization environment need a way more complex
setup anyway to do it right (spread I/O on multiple disks, tune
page-cluster and bulks to your disk I/O HW and so on).

The remaining share of people suffering might be those that want to enable
Hibernate (non default anyway as you mentioned).
Just give them a reasonable and easy path if they want to do so. But I
think the overwrite swapsize option will do.

But I guess we have to realize that this discussion perfectly qualifies to
expect to never make everybody happy anyway.




-- 
Christian Ehrhardt
Software Engineer, Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20161103/343bf5b6/attachment.html>


More information about the ubuntu-devel mailing list