On Friday, June 5, 2020 11:48:14 AM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 6:43 AM Michael Catanzaro
<mcatanzaro(a)gnome.org>
wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 1:52 am, Chris Murphy <lists(a)colorremedies.com>
> wrote:
>
> > That is the plan, otherwise the swap-on-zram device probably never
> > gets used. And then its overhead, which is small but not zero, is just
> > a waste.
>
>
>
> I thought the plan was to get rid of the disk-based swap partition,
> since it has an unacceptable impact on system responsiveness?
Default new installations, yes. No disk-based swap partition.
For upgrades, there's no mechanism to remove an existing
swap-on-drive. And the installer will still permit swap-on-drive being
added in custom partitioning. Both of these paths results in two swap
devices.
We could ask Anaconda, if a custom installation creates swap-on-disk,
to remove /etc/systemd/zram-generator.conf. And in that case, users
will not get swap-on-zram. And we could also forgo the change being
applied on upgrades.
It may be best to respect the user's decision, and not add a zram device on
upgraded systems. This would lead to less unexpected behavior. I'd support
that, for sure :)
--
John M. Harris, Jr.