On Friday, June 5, 2020 12:16:36 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 1:10 PM John M. Harris Jr
<johnmh(a)splentity.com>
wrote:
>
>
> On Friday, June 5, 2020 12:03:03 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
> > In discussions with both cloud and server folks, their use cases often
> > do not even create disk-based swap at all. A small swap-on-zram
> > provides all the benefits of inactive anonymous page eviction,
> > including reducing reclaim of file pages, without the black hole
> > performance problems of swap-on-drive.
> >
> >
> >
> > So yes it's well suited for these cases and the proposal does include
> > them. If they wish to be left out, that's up to those working groups.
> > It's possible to make sure /etc/systemd/zram-generator is not present.
>
>
>
> That doesn't seem to reflect reality. If you download the Server image
> right now, and go with its automatic partitioning scheme generation,
> it'll give you a swap partition on LVM. This is correct for most servers,
> not necessarily the LVM part, but having swap on disk.
The proposal recommends changing this. Cloud and Server folks will
decide what's best for their use cases, not me.
In that case, would you be open to changing this proposal to only affect
Workstation?
--
John M. Harris, Jr.