On Mon, Nov 01, 2004 at 09:23:06AM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Sat, Oct 30, 2004 at 08:47:36AM -0700, Mike Witt wrote: > > Isn't that around 188 Meg of swap space? My system has 128 Meg of memory, > > and in the past I seem to remember allocation about four times as much > > swap space as I had physical memory, with better results. > > Am I nuts? Does swap space only need to be the size of physical memory? > > I don't really understand the issues here. Advice? > > Well, one of the issues is: if you're using swap _at all_, your system is > going to be horribly slow. In my estimation, unbearable for interactive use > -- others may have more patience. Swap should be there for emergencies (and > perhaps so long-running processess that rarely get used get moved out of the > way -- but that's only going to be a few megabytes at most). > > On a system with only 128MB of RAM, I'd try to run as lightweight an > environment as possible. Ditch GNOME and KDE, to start.... Now I am on the other side of the argument. It is not necessary to ditch Gnome and KDE for such a system although having only one of them is necessary, But other things might be ditched. Are you going to do development of kernels, or other systems? If not don't install their development rpms. Games in such a system can be dropped. You may not be interested in being a web, name or other kind of server? If not drop that option form the installed list. Although I have an argument with one of my colleagues about this my experience is that 128MB is enough if you don't install everything, but choose your installation options wisely. -- ------------------------------------------- Aaron Konstam Computer Science Trinity University One Trinity Place. San Antonio, TX 78212-7200 telephone: (210)-999-7484 email:akonstam@xxxxxxxxxxx
