Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 17 Jun 1999 12:46:37 -0700
From:      "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg@monkeys.com>
To:        Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com>
Cc:        mladavac@metropolitan.at, questions@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: Desperate to shrink a partition 
Message-ID:  <23595.929648797@monkeys.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 17 Jun 1999 07:29:16 -0400. <199906171129.HAA13988@lakes.dignus.com> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

In message <199906171129.HAA13988@lakes.dignus.com>, you wrote:

>> Now the problem:  When this system was setup (and partitioned) initially
>> it had a MUCH bigger swap space than physical memory.  It has since had
>> physical memory added however.  It now has 320MB physical and only a
>> single 140MB swap partition setup for it.  
>
> Maybe this is what's causing the panics?  I thought swap had to be
> at least as large as physical memory...  and the casual recommendation
> is for it to be twice as large.

I never heard of THAT rule before!

Why would that be necessary?

If all programs and data on the system always run comfortably within
the available physical memory, then why should anyone need _anything_
other than a token swap partition?

(Of course, I am leaving out the usefulness of swap partitions for debugging
kernel malfunctions. :-(



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?23595.929648797>