ok to the naming and multi zram devices questions:
1) one single large space is wasteful if you have your machine up for
longer than a single (or series ) of heavy lifting operations --say you
are rendering a video and then back to the usual grind stuff would you want
all that extra space just wasted ? also say a follow up process is in need
of more would you wanna be stuck on previous values? zram is dynamic in
nature smaller more numerous /dev/zram$i allows for that and in a dynamic
manner...
2) it the RAM its based off not swap and the "z" is known as dynamic
Corey W Sheldon
Freelance IT Consultant, Multi-Discipline Tutor
310.909.7672
www.facebook.com/1stclassmobileshine
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 7:39 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl(a)thelounge.net>
wrote:
Am 28.11.2014 um 01:34 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 01:21:26AM +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 04:42:36PM +0100, Juan Orti wrote:
>>
>>> El 2014-11-27 14:48, Reindl Harald escribió:
>>>
>>>> Am 27.11.2014 um 14:25 schrieb Juan Orti:
>>>>
>>>>> Reindl, I'm of the opinion you should upload your scripts to some
git
>>>>> repository and package them to be part of the distribution. I can
>>>>> co-maintain if you wish
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> feel free to package it!
>>>>
>>>> that's why i attached it as i saw the topic
>>>> i am not a active packager on the Fedora infrastrcuture
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ok, I've uploaded the scripts to GitHub and submitted a review request:
>>>
>>>
https://github.com/jorti/zram-swap
>>>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1168692
>>>
>> I have a question about the code: why are multiple swap devices needed?
>> /sys/block/zram0/max_comp_streams can be set to whatever number is
>> wanted. While it might be useful to have additional zram devices
>> for different purposes, I don't think more than one zram swap is
>> useful. If you only have one device, then reloading the module is
>> no longer necessary to change the parameters, since everything
>> else seems to be configurable through sysfs.
>>
> And another question (sorry, I never used compressed swap before):
> why not zswap? It seems to be a better fit for the desktop/server
> environments that Fedora is used for. IIUC, zswap is better because
> it overflows automatically into the backing swap device
>
on machines with plenty RAM i prefer not have a swap partition or a swap
file at all - especially on virtual machines it's a waste of (possible
expensive SAN) disk storage
on virtual servers currently i prefer zram inside the guest to avoid OOM
conditions in the guest while the memory compression of the hypervisor
steps in too late and is more for overcommit the host
--
devel mailing list
devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct:
http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct