I have noticed that for the Pi on both a 3B+ and a 4B 8GB Ram both using
a HDD and SSD respectively there is no swap partition set up.
Every other Linux system I have does even if the Ram is 16 GB so two questions:
Is there a good reason why it does not get set up ?
What is the best way to set one up.
For best performance, I would also ensure the swap partition was at the *front* on a HDD; for a SSD (or SD card), it wouldn't matter.
I have noticed that for the Pi on both a 3B+ and a 4B 8GB Ram
both using a HDD and SSD respectively there is no swap partition
set up.
Huh. I hadn't even noticed. Just checked my own 3B+, and sure enough,
no swap...With what I do with it, it doesn't need a swap. But, as you described later on, you plan to do something very different.
Every other Linux system I have does even if the Ram is 16 GB so
two questions: Is there a good reason why it does not get set up
? What is the best way to set one up.
My first guess would be that this is done to prevent the early death
of the SD card. After all, not that long ago, the SD card was the only
place one could install PiOS. And SD cards wear out quite a bit faster
than a HDD or SSD.
I'm not sure if it's the best way, but *my* way would be to install
gparted (or equivalent), resize the main partition, and build a swap partition. Reboot, 'swapon', and Bob's yer uncle.
For best performance, I would also ensure the swap partition was at
the *front* on a HDD; for a SSD (or SD card), it wouldn't matter.
On Fri, 08 Apr 2022 15:05:11 +1200 nospam.Shaun.Buzza@f110.n229.z1.fidonet.org (Shaun Buzza) wrote:
For best performance, I would also ensure the swap partition was at
the *front* on a HDD; for a SSD (or SD card), it wouldn't matter.
Why ? Putting it dead centre of the tracks would seem to minimise average seek time to the swap area.
I have noticed that for the Pi on both a 3B+ and a 4B 8GB Ram both using a HDD
and SSD respectively there is no swap partition set up.
Yes that is the way to go - it is just why on earth that do not provide it.
I must admit it is a first and only instance of this - I have NEVER seen this else where and that includes many, many installs even for *nix's including Cromix going back to the late 70's and early 80's.
Suppose that's what happens when non professions build distro's without reading the manuals.
That's because Raspbian is setup to use a swap file, see my post of a
few minutes ago.
So the Pi Foundation didn't include a swap partition. That makes them 'unprofessional'? You're the same every time you leave the house without SCUBA
gear, then! Who knows, someone might want to go diving, you unprofessional so-and-so!
Hello All!
I have noticed that for the Pi on both a 3B+ and a 4B 8GB Ram both using a HDD
and SSD respectively there is no swap partition set up.
Every other Linux system I have does even if the Ram is 16 GB so two questions:
Is there a good reason why it does not get set up ?
What is the best way to set one up.
Since you brought it up: in the 70s and 80s (and even into the very early 90s), 1 MB of RAM was unimaginable,
That's because Raspbian is setup to use a swap file, see my post of a
few minutes ago.
On Fri, 08 Apr 2022 18:12:56 +1200 nospam.Shaun.Buzza@f110.n229.z1.fidonet.org (Shaun Buzza) wrote:
Since you brought it up: in the 70s and 80s (and even into the very early
90s), 1 MB of RAM was unimaginable,
The original workstation recipe was 1 MIP, 1 megabyte and 1
megapixel - it's grossly inadequate these days in MIPs and megabytes
although its rare to see the megapixel exceeded by even one order of magnitude (although they tend to be 32 bit pixels now).
Am 08.04.22 um 22:34 schrieb druck:
That's because Raspbian is setup to use a swap file, see my post of
a few minutes ago.
If I have a swap partition in an USB HDD
which swap ist used?
the swap file on SD or the swap partition on hdd?
Exist suspend to disk for raspberry pi?
I heard such machines referred to as "3M". This was presumably a
play on the name of the Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company,
the creators of Scotch Tape [tm]. (Their name was much better known
in those days.)
On Sat, 09 Apr 2022 18:07:57 GMT
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
I heard such machines referred to as "3M". This was presumably a
play on the name of the Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company,
the creators of Scotch Tape [tm]. (Their name was much better known
in those days.)
The 3M name is still well known and is to be found proudly
emblazoned on the protective film over pretty much every self-adhesive
thing that actually sticks and stays stuck, many people have noticed
this and worry if they don't see it (Gorilla is good too but much
newer and still building trust).
On this side of the pond Scotch tape is almost unheard of because
of Sellotape.
On this side of the pond Scotch tape is almost unheard of because
of Sellotape.
On this side of the pond Scotch tape is almost unheard of because
of Sellotape.
Most rolls of Sellotape eventually go manky, but I've never known Scotch tape do
that.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On this side of the pond Scotch tape is almost unheard of because
of Sellotape.
Most rolls of Sellotape eventually go manky, but I've never known Scotch
tape do that.
I wasn't trying to suggest that Sellotape was better, it's just as universal as Cadbury's chocolate here and about as far from being the
best.
On Sun, 10 Apr 2022 10:10:34 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
I wasn't trying to suggest that Sellotape was better, it's just
as universal as Cadbury's chocolate here and about as far from being the best.
IIRC Cadbury's used to be pretty good chocolate: I used to like their
Energy Chocolate (very dark colour and not very sweet) until the company
was bought by Kraft in 2010, at which point their products quickly became inedible sweet junk.
On Sun, 10 Apr 2022 12:30:55 -0000 (UTC)
Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 10 Apr 2022 10:10:34 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
I wasn't trying to suggest that Sellotape was better, it's just
as universal as Cadbury's chocolate here and about as far from being
the best.
IIRC Cadbury's used to be pretty good chocolate: I used to like their
Energy Chocolate (very dark colour and not very sweet) until the
company
It's never been good by Dutch/Belgian/Swiss[n] or even German
standards ...
was bought by Kraft in 2010, at which point their products quickly
became inedible sweet junk.
... but yeah it used to be a lot better than it is now.
[n] OK ok Nestle ... very sad.
What did you make of "Tony's Chocolonely"? Dutch, but rather too sweet
and not dark enough for my taste,plus the 'crazy paving' break lines
instead of a rectangular grid was annoying. However, it seems to have disapeared: not surprised as I didn't bother with a second bar.
OTOH I usually have a bar of Lindt 90% dark in the house, even though I
eat very little chocolate.
Hello All!
I have noticed that for the Pi on both a 3B+ and a 4B 8GB Ram both using a HDD
and SSD respectively there is no swap partition set up.
Others have suggested why the default might be no swap for ther
"standard" SD card run Pi. Alot of replies where off-topic without the courtesy of changing the subject line - sigh.
the companyExactly. I used to buy the Bournville chocolate. Occasionally a milk
was bought by Kraft in 2010, at which point their products quickly became inedible sweet junk.
Friday April 08 2022 20:50, you wrote to Shaun Buzza:][Swap parition location]
> Why ? Putting it dead centre of the tracks would seem to minimise
> average seek time to the swap area.
For a mainframe easy but for a micro using any O/S almost impossible - they is
not the control to do so with out being VERY specific what cylinders / sectors
to use and that means knowing exacting the size of the drive and the use of a calculator :)
Since you brought it up: in the 70s and 80s (and even into the very early 90s),
1 MB of RAM was unimaginable, and 1 GB was absolutely impossible.
On Fri, 08 Apr 2022 15:05:11 +1200 nospam.Shaun.Buzza@f110.n229.z1.fidonet.org (Shaun Buzza) wrote:
For best performance, I would also ensure the swap partition was at the
*front* on a HDD; for a SSD (or SD card), it wouldn't matter.
Why ? Putting it dead centre of the tracks would seem to minimise average seek time to the swap area.
Shaun Buzza <nospam.Shaun.Buzza@f110.n229.z1.fidonet.org> wrote:
Since you brought it up: in the 70s and 80s (and even into the very
early 90s), 1 MB of RAM was unimaginable, and 1 GB was absolutely
impossible.
It didn't take that long to get to 1 MB. The 68K desktops (Mac,
Amiga, etc.) of the second half of the '80s mostly shipped with at
least 1 MB. It wasn't just the 68K boxes, either. While the Apple
IIGS shipped with 256K at its introduction in 1986, it didn't take
long for most to conclude it really needed at least 1 MB if you wished
to use it as more than just a faster IIe.
(I could mention the Lisa, introduced in 1983 with 1 MB, but its $10k pricetag kept it out of reach of most. It was only two or three years
later that the Macintosh Plus shipped with the same 1 MB for thousands
less.)
On 10/04/2022 13:30, Martin Gregorie wrote:
the company
was bought by Kraft in 2010, at which point their products quickly became
inedible sweet junk.
Exactly. I used to buy the Bournville chocolate. Occasionally a milk chocolate fruit and nut bar.
I bought precisely one post takeover and threw it away uneaten
Why marketing people think that the _only_ thing that matters in a
consumer product is the marketing, is beyond me.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
On Fri, 08 Apr 2022 15:05:11 +1200 nospam.Shaun.Buzza@f110.n229.z1.fidonet.org (Shaun Buzza) wrote:
For best performance, I would also ensure the swap partition was at the
*front* on a HDD; for a SSD (or SD card), it wouldn't matter.
Why ? Putting it dead centre of the tracks would seem to
minimise average seek time to the swap area.
For spinning rust, data transfer rates are usually higher at the beginning
of the disk than at the end.
Why marketing people think that the _only_ thing that matters in a
consumer product is the marketing, is beyond me.
On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 15:22:47 GMT
scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us wrote:
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
On Fri, 08 Apr 2022 15:05:11 +1200
nospam.Shaun.Buzza@f110.n229.z1.fidonet.org (Shaun Buzza) wrote:
For best performance, I would also ensure the swap partition was at the >>>> *front* on a HDD; for a SSD (or SD card), it wouldn't matter.
Why ? Putting it dead centre of the tracks would seem to
minimise average seek time to the swap area.
For spinning rust, data transfer rates are usually higher at the beginning >> of the disk than at the end.
Sure but seek times matter more than data rate on a busy system.
And now I walk around with a thumb drive in my
pocket that cost me $1 per gigabyte.
On 2022-04-11, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 10/04/2022 13:30, Martin Gregorie wrote:
the company
was bought by Kraft in 2010, at which point their products quickly became >>> inedible sweet junk.
Exactly. I used to buy the Bournville chocolate. Occasionally a milk
chocolate fruit and nut bar.
I bought precisely one post takeover and threw it away uneaten
Why marketing people think that the _only_ thing that matters in a
consumer product is the marketing, is beyond me.
Because it makes them lots of money?
No one in this world, so far as I know - and
I have searched the records for years, and
employed agents to help me - has ever lost
money by underestimating the intelligence of
the great masses of the plain people.
has anyone ever lost public office thereby.Oh yes they have
-- H.L. Mencken
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
On Fri, 08 Apr 2022 15:05:11 +1200
nospam.Shaun.Buzza@f110.n229.z1.fidonet.org (Shaun Buzza) wrote:
For best performance, I would also ensure the swap partition was at the
*front* on a HDD; for a SSD (or SD card), it wouldn't matter.
Why ? Putting it dead centre of the tracks would seem to minimise >> average seek time to the swap area.
For spinning rust, data transfer rates are usually higher at the beginning
of the disk than at the end.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
On Fri, 08 Apr 2022 15:05:11 +1200
nospam.Shaun.Buzza@f110.n229.z1.fidonet.org (Shaun Buzza) wrote:
For best performance, I would also ensure the swap partition was at
the *front* on a HDD; for a SSD (or SD card), it wouldn't matter.
Why ? Putting it dead centre of the tracks would seem to
minimise
average seek time to the swap area.
For spinning rust, data transfer rates are usually higher at the
beginning of the disk than at the end.
On 11/04/2022 16:22, scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us wrote:
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:Not on a disk with constant sectors per track, it ain't...
On Fri, 08 Apr 2022 15:05:11 +1200
nospam.Shaun.Buzza@f110.n229.z1.fidonet.org (Shaun Buzza) wrote:
For best performance, I would also ensure the swap partition was at the >>>> *front* on a HDD; for a SSD (or SD card), it wouldn't matter.
Why ? Putting it dead centre of the tracks would seem to minimise >>> average seek time to the swap area.
For spinning rust, data transfer rates are usually higher at the beginning >> of the disk than at the end.
On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 16:17:26 GMT
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
And now I walk around with a thumb drive in my
pocket that cost me $1 per gigabyte.
An expensive one then, they're running about 35-40c per gigabyte
now in sizes up 512GB for thumb drives and a bit less for 1Tb drives from reputable suppliers.
| Sysop: | deepend |
|---|---|
| Location: | Calgary, Alberta |
| Users: | 240 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 09:37:24 |
| Calls: | 1,464 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 3,372 |
| Messages: | 360,447 |