Partitioning tips and ideas?



I'm on LM 17 Cinnamon and tried to get 2 swaps running.
Creating them and getting them loaded at startup was fine...
But I found nowhere how to change their priority in order to interleave...
I thought I could change that is fstab, but at no avail...
Where is this thing hiding and how to configure it???
 
I'm on LM 17 Cinnamon and tried to get 2 swaps running.
Creating them and getting them loaded at startup was fine...
But I found nowhere how to change their priority in order to interleave...
I thought I could change that is fstab, but at no avail...
Where is this thing hiding and how to configure it???
Two swaps??? Why two? I have never heard of this before. If needed, increase the size of the single swap. Please explain.
 
Two swap partitions on two different disks for interleaving, it doubles its R'n'W speeds. The swap partition is 2Gb for 2Gb RAM, the size is plenty, I guess... I brought down swappiness to favour RAM over swap and the HD is a 7200, fast enough for the Pentium M 1.75Ghz, I guess... No??
 
Two swap partitions on two different disks for interleaving, it doubles its R'n'W speeds. The swap partition is 2Gb for 2Gb RAM, the size is plenty, I guess... I brought down swappiness to favour RAM over swap and the HD is a 7200, fast enough for the Pentium M 1.75Ghz, I guess... No??

You are in luck. An article on Swap is going to be released in one-three weeks here on this website.

By the way, here is a fstab example. The priority is set with "pri=100". The priority values are 0 to 32767.

/dev/sda3 none swap defaults,pri=100 0 0
/dev/sdc5 none swap defaults,pri=1000 0 0
 
You are in luck. An article on Swap is going to be released in one-three weeks here on this website.

By the way, here is a fstab example. The priority is set with "pri=100". The priority values are 0 to 32767.

/dev/sda3 none swap defaults,pri=100 0 0
/dev/sdc5 none swap defaults,pri=1000 0 0


The way that you've put it there, the priority isn't the same for both, so no interleaving??? Shouldn't they have the same priority level for it to work?????
 
You are in luck. An article on Swap is going to be released in one-three weeks here on this website.

By the way, here is a fstab example. The priority is set with "pri=100". The priority values are 0 to 32767.

/dev/sda3 none swap defaults,pri=100 0 0
/dev/sdc5 none swap defaults,pri=1000 0 0

Did that and went back to swapon -s to see that it made no difference whatsoever to the priority...
 
Did that and went back to swapon -s to see that it made no difference whatsoever to the priority...

I just copied the example from my up-coming swap article. That is why the priorities did not match.

Search this page for "interleave" - http://www.computerhope.com/unix/swapon.htm
Same content (word-for-word, apparently), but different website - http://manpages.courier-mta.org/htmlman8/swapon.8.html

It appears that interleaving is the default. If your system is not doing so, then perhaps your system thinks that interleaving would not gain the system extra performance.
 
Oooh!! Great!! At last the answer I was hoping for..
Thank You ever so much Dev..
Cheers!!
 
Was this thread hijacked at post #22?
re: swap -- are two separate hard drives being utilized?
Slackware (as in Salix) never gave me problems with two small swaps on same hard drive (first time was an accident) -- try one of 'em as a suggestion -- I would favor salix or absolute
 
Was this thread hijacked at post #22?
re: swap -- are two separate hard drives being utilized?
Slackware (as in Salix) never gave me problems with two small swaps on same hard drive (first time was an accident) -- try one of 'em as a suggestion -- I would favor salix or absolute

I'm happy that it's still active, :p
 
If I understand correctly, the system interleaves automatically to whatever the number of swap partitions one might have.. I use swap partitions on two different drives for two reasons: speed and errors (space has to be totally free).
Speed through interleaving and error free cause the space has to be totally free and should not risk splitting...
 
Memory management in Windoze and the same in GNU/Linux are not the same. Semi-paranoid security freaks may disagree, but the same fuss necessary (as, by tweaking the registry) in one to achieve adequate memory partitioning (as in a whole separate hard drive just for the swapfile) may not be or is not worth the effort in Linux.
 
Last edited:

Members online


Latest posts

Top