lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1997]   [Nov]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Ideas for memory management hackers (2)
    Is it possible to have another partition type? That would eliminate any
    compatibility problems between the two...
    -Rob H.

    On Mon, 17 Nov 1997, teunis wrote:

    > On Mon, 17 Nov 1997, Matti Aarnio wrote:
    >
    > > > From: Evan Jeffrey <ejeffrey@utrek.ml.org>
    > > ...
    > > > I think it would be better to create a "new" swapfile type for > 128 (or
    > > > 512) MB swap areas, where the swap area signature (SWAP-SPACE ?) would be
    > > > replaced by something like "NEW-SWAPXX" where XX is a short int indicating
    > > > the number of bitmap blocks at the beginning of this swap area. This give
    > > > us an ~8 TB theoretical limit, which is pretty big.
    > >
    > > Theorethically nice, but I am such a person who has a habit
    > > of jumping back and forth between radically different kernel
    > > versions (2.0.x and 2.1.x!), and therefore I do prefer methods
    > > that don't require me do radical operations at system boot;
    > > like "mkswap" at each boot on which even the "mkswap" should
    > > recognize what the system understands at the moment...
    >
    > BIG swap vs normal swap?
    > have normal swap operate normally?
    >
    > You'll never notice - unless you decide to create a >128M swapfile (i386)
    > and then you'll discover 2.0.x can't handle such swap sizes.....
    > [and it will (hopefully?) be ignored...]
    >
    > G'day, eh? :)
    > - Teunis
    >


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:40    [W:0.019 / U:2.692 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site