Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!peer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!backlog3.nntp.dca3.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.posted.gcicommunications!news.posted.gcicommunications.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 00:17:30 -0500 Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup Subject: Re: Is it true that it is a bad idea to put a swap/pagefile on a SSD? References: <280620141511008709%nospam@nospam.invalid> <874mz496r6.fld@barrow.com> <280620141555147959%nospam@nospam.invalid> <87vbrk7nsm.fld@barrow.com> <280620141802446932%nospam@nospam.invalid> <87bntc7bqp.fld@barrow.com> <1boaxc5u3t.fsf@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net> From: floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) Organization: __________ Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2014 21:17:29 -0800 Message-ID: <8738eo70ra.fld@barrow.com> User-Agent: gnus 5.10.6/XEmacs 21.4.15/Linux 2.6.19 Cancel-Lock: sha1:S8iJepV7n3wW8O3xf/OC/4EpYZU= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 34 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.237.125.254 X-Trace: sv3-c2YQxhemGtK75cZOU9c7ShHL8E41lSEldnLMaBXTWP/G+p9kK9kHoDX9QfOVts3qsMe7oqe4rHnvZKZ!RGXy0N8SZJNKX8rahccKtfudY3Ddnk9FpXIJIrbxUE7yUCI0AWiOTjCIJOxbif+fs1Po+Ae3 X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 X-Original-Bytes: 2760 X-Received-Bytes: 2872 X-Received-Body-CRC: 355141877 Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.hardware:2470 comp.os.linux.setup:3639 Joe Pfeiffer wrote: >floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) writes: > >> Larry Blanchard wrote: >>>On Sat, 28 Jun 2014 18:02:44 -0400, nospam wrote: >>> >>>> what matters is the computers that people actually have and what they do >>>> on them, not how you think it should be. >>> >>>pot vs kettle ???? >> >> Not really, because nospam is just plain wrong. >> >> He responded as above to this statement: >> >> "Computers that "don't do much of anything" don't need or >> use that type of effective design. But those with real >> loads do." >> >> There is no pot or kettle in that. You and I posted a pair of >> examples that shows exactly how opposite from reality his >> concept is. In fact there are many large busy computer systems >> that are purposely configured to not require ever using swap >> space. The reason is simple: running out of swap space is >> unconscionably slow, and to be avoided. > >From the posting style, is it another Rod Speed sockpuppet? That would >explain everything. They certainly appear to be peas from the same pod! -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/ Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com