On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 05:25:15PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 2:48 PM David Kaufmann <astra(a)ionic.at>
> On Sat, Jun 06, 2020 at 05:36:15PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > To me this sounds like too much dependency on swap.
> That's not what I meant, I wanted to emphasize the different values of
> disk storage vs. RAM. As said in another email it doesn't matter at all
> if there is 0% or 90% of disk swap usage, while RAM usage can be quite
> essential. (This is in case swapped out stuff stays swapped out.)
Inactive pages that are evicted long term, is a workload that I think
would benefit from zswap instead. In that case you get the benefit of
the memory cache for recently used anonymous pages that would
otherwise result in "swap thrashing" and the "least recently used"
pages are moved to disk based swap.
Is this how it works? Previously it was stated that once a page is
swapped to a particular swap device, that's it. It would be nice if a
page which has been sitting in zram for a while could be swapped out
to the slower / cheaper / larger disk.
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
virt-builder quickly builds VMs from scratch