Re: [RFC] VM: I have a dream...

[Barry K. Nathan]

On 1/22/06, Chase Venters <chase.venters@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Just as a curiosity... does anyone have any guesses as to the runtime
> performance cost of hosting one or more swap files (which thanks to on demand
> creation and growth are presumably built of blocks scattered around the disk)
> versus having one or more simple contiguous swap partitions?
>
> I think it's probably a given that swap partitions are better; I'm just
> curious how much better they might actually be.

If you google "mac os x swap partition", you'll find benchmarks from
several years ago. (Although, those benchmarks are with a partition
dedicated to the dynamically created swap files. It does more or less
ensure that the files are contiguous though.) Mac OS X was *much* more
of a dog back then, in terms of performance, so I don't know how
relevant those benchmarks are nowadays, but it might be a starting
point for answering your question.

--
-Barry K. Nathan <barryn@xxxxxxxxx>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/