Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #763
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.misc |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: linux raid vs hw raid |
| From | Tris Orendorff <triso@remove-me.cogeco.ca> |
| References | (2 earlier) <Xe-dnXd4LLb1gwHQnZ2dnUVZ7sWdnZ2d@lyse.net> <kr0v68xq47.ln2@goaway.wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> <tllsp6ltftsq6ufp048hcc4ivufupgbmki@4ax.com> <Xns9EC58F37B7D8RepublicPicturesLtd@69.16.185.250> <dkqcq698epjubcv8urilvllhoout1f268q@4ax.com> |
| Message-ID | <Xns9EC8B71A29697RepublicPicturesLtd@69.16.185.247> (permalink) |
| Date | 2011-04-15 21:59 +0000 |
Grant <omg@grrr.id.au> burped up warm pablum in......................................................................... news:dkqcq698epjubcv8urilvllhoout1f268q@4ax.com: > On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 18:04:44 GMT, Tris Orendorff > <triso@remove-me.cogeco.ca> wrote: > >>Grant <omg@grrr.id.au> burped up warm pablum in >>news:tllsp6ltftsq6ufp048hcc4ivufupgbmki@4ax.com: >> >>> >>> Swap space? RAID10 is best for that, from my reading. Got to be >>> careful with swap reliability because bad swap will crash the >>> machine and possibly eat your data. Same as bad memory. >> >> Swap space? Isn't that useless for a server? We've found it >> next-to-useless on our desktops even with the fastest >>SSDs. > > So you'd rather crash when a process needs a large contiguous memory > block Now! And, the memory is fragmented because the machine uptime > is high In general, yes. It is going to crash by swapping and thashing anyway--so why wait? > Swap is still relevant to keep a machine running, maybe not a lot of > it. Somewhere upthread I described using swap for /tmp space overflow > as well. > > I've seen swap used when there was ample memory, and the argument > above is how I've seen it for years, something changed? Yes! The 64-bit proccessor is one reason and Java is another. Four GB isn't enough for the 100 or so processes needed for a 64-bit Linux ayatem to run apps. Once a Java program hits swap it is lost on the next garbage collection (gc). The gc has to trace down every objject in memory and with millions of objects and the slowdown due to swapping it is a lost cause. The simple answer is to add ram not swap-space. -- Tris Orendorff [ Anyone naming their child should spend a few minutes checking rhyming slang and dodgy sounding names. Brad and Angelina failed to do this when naming their kid Shiloh Pitt. At some point, someone at school is going to spoonerise her name. Craig Stark ]
Back to comp.os.linux.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
linux raid vs hw raid Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2011-04-05 19:39 -0700
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Tim Watts <tw@dionic.net> - 2011-04-06 08:01 +0100
Re: linux raid vs hw raid David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2011-04-06 10:03 +0200
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2011-04-06 14:00 -0700
Re: linux raid vs hw raid David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2011-04-06 23:42 +0200
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Grant <omg@grrr.id.au> - 2011-04-08 10:45 +1000
Re: linux raid vs hw raid David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2011-04-08 11:12 +0200
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2011-04-08 08:22 -0700
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Grant <omg@grrr.id.au> - 2011-04-09 09:51 +1000
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2011-04-08 17:10 -0700
Re: linux raid vs hw raid David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2011-04-09 13:14 +0200
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Grant <omg@grrr.id.au> - 2011-04-09 09:47 +1000
Re: linux raid vs hw raid David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2011-04-09 13:55 +0200
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Tris Orendorff <triso@remove-me.cogeco.ca> - 2011-04-12 18:04 +0000
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2011-04-12 11:34 -0700
Re: linux raid vs hw raid The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-04-12 21:13 +0100
Re: linux raid vs hw raid David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2011-04-13 09:45 +0200
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Grant <omg@grrr.id.au> - 2011-04-14 13:42 +1000
Re: linux raid vs hw raid David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2011-04-14 09:15 +0200
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Grant <omg@grrr.id.au> - 2011-04-15 08:03 +1000
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Tim Watts <tw@dionic.net> - 2011-04-15 07:22 +0100
Re: linux raid vs hw raid David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2011-04-15 09:28 +0200
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Grant <omg@grrr.id.au> - 2011-04-19 11:20 +1000
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Grant <omg@grrr.id.au> - 2011-04-14 13:38 +1000
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2011-04-13 21:49 -0700
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Grant <omg@grrr.id.au> - 2011-04-14 13:34 +1000
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Tris Orendorff <triso@remove-me.cogeco.ca> - 2011-04-15 21:59 +0000
Re: linux raid vs hw raid "Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at> - 2011-04-16 00:56 +0200
Re: linux raid vs hw raid The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-04-16 01:32 +0100
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2011-04-08 21:38 +0300
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Grant <omg@grrr.id.au> - 2011-04-09 09:53 +1000
Re: linux raid vs hw raid KR <kristian.rasmussen@broadpark.no.spam.com> - 2011-04-09 11:56 +0200
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2011-04-09 10:32 -0700
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Grant <omg@grrr.id.au> - 2011-04-10 11:12 +1000
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2011-04-09 18:59 -0700
Re: linux raid vs hw raid KR <kristian.rasmussen@broadpark.no.spam.com> - 2011-04-10 04:32 +0200
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Grant <omg@grrr.id.au> - 2011-04-10 12:46 +1000
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2011-04-09 20:39 -0700
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2011-04-10 03:47 +0000
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net> - 2011-04-10 11:11 +0530
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2011-04-09 23:29 -0700
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net> - 2011-04-10 14:05 +0530
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Grant <omg@grrr.id.au> - 2011-04-10 20:16 +1000
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Tim Watts <tw@dionic.net> - 2011-04-10 11:28 +0100
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net> - 2011-04-10 19:43 +0530
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2011-04-12 03:44 +0000
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net> - 2011-04-12 13:56 +0530
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Grant <omg@grrr.id.au> - 2011-04-10 20:09 +1000
Re: linux raid vs hw raid Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2011-04-12 03:37 +0000
csiph-web