From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Mar 14 13:08:30 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id NAA02079 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 14 Mar 1995 13:08:30 -0800 Received: from deacon.cogsci.ed.ac.uk ([129.215.144.7]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id NAA02058 for ; Tue, 14 Mar 1995 13:08:22 -0800 Received: (from richard@localhost) by deacon.cogsci.ed.ac.uk (8.6.10/8.6.9) id OAA03371; Tue, 14 Mar 1995 14:34:29 GMT Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 14:34:29 GMT Message-Id: <199503141434.OAA03371@deacon.cogsci.ed.ac.uk> From: Richard Tobin Subject: Re: install compressed binary patch To: Steven G Kargl , davidg@Root.COM In-Reply-To: Steven G Kargl's message of Mon, 13 Mar 1995 17:13:45 -0800 (PST) Organization: just say no Cc: phk@ref.tfs.com, freebsd-hackers@freefall.cdrom.com Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Do you have some rule of thumb? I usually go with 2 * RAM, but if this > is not sufficient what is necessary. This and similar rules of thumb are the wrong way round. The amount of swap space you need is not determined by how much RAM you have! Rather, then amount of swap space is determined by what programs you want to run simultaneously, and you should have as much RAM as possible up to that amount. Of course, things will be slooow if you don't have enough RAM, so a rule of thumb might be to have at least half as much RAM as swap. But note that if you translate this to swap in terms if RAM, it says that 2 * RAM is a *maximum* amount of swap, not a minimum or a recommendation. -- Richard