Re: MacOS X equivalent of swapon/swapoff?
Re: MacOS X equivalent of swapon/swapoff?
- Subject: Re: MacOS X equivalent of swapon/swapoff?
- From: Steve Sisak <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 08:52:43 -0400
At 8:31 AM -0400 10/11/06, John Francini wrote:
I hadn't thought about it that way; I guess I was still going by the
'old school' idea that there might be times when a process would be
completely paged out (in other words, *swapping* rather than
paging), and that therefore contiguous disk space would have been a
good thing.
If you work out the statistics, I don't think there's any need for
such a distinction (except in degenerate cases).
Another thing to think about is that having a separate swap
_partition_ on a system with a single drive would likely decrease
performance as the drive has to constantly seek between the system
and swap partitions, which are going to be on different parts of the
disk.
A separate swap drive would be another story, but in the real world
that is only likely on servers and possibly high-end workstations.
That said, as a developer who has to keep multiple boot partitions
(for different OS versions), I do wish Mac OS X provided an easy way
to specify an alternate volume to use for all scratch allocations
(VM, /tmp, etc.), rather than forcing them to be on the boot volume.
It's somewhat annoying to need 4GB free on the root volume in order
to burn a DVD.
Allowing me to redirect all boot partitions' scratch storage to a
single "big disk" would reduce the size of an individual boot
partition significantly.
Ditto for user home directories (although I know how to do that with NetInfo).
-Steve
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden