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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans