<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Swap using non-lvm type disk in Operating System - HP-UX</title>
    <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/swap-using-non-lvm-type-disk/m-p/4182180#M322571</link>
    <description>I disagree. When you define a device for swap you use the CHARACTER device, to remove any overhead that may be induced by using the block device.&lt;BR /&gt;The onlyu time swap will really impose any great overhead is if you were to use file system swap, and that can REALLY give a performance hit.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Also, the LVM overhead is so small in reality it would also make little difference&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Just my experience&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 19:29:25 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>melvyn burnard</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2008-04-17T19:29:25Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Swap using non-lvm type disk</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/swap-using-non-lvm-type-disk/m-p/4182178#M322569</link>
      <description>Reading the man page for swapon talks about using any block type device for swap. Leading me to think that a whole disk (san disk) could be used for swap instead of using a standard lvm disk.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I therefore masked/mapped an 8gb disk to the server in need of swap and swapped-on the disk using the block device and it took it.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;My question is simple - using swap space in whole disks rather than LVM disk should give better performance due to the LVM layer being removed ... True? &lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;What do the experts think?</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 18:28:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/swap-using-non-lvm-type-disk/m-p/4182178#M322569</guid>
      <dc:creator>Smucker</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-04-17T18:28:46Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Swap using non-lvm type disk</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/swap-using-non-lvm-type-disk/m-p/4182179#M322570</link>
      <description>I don't think so, because LVM does not add noticeable overhead.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;this idea came from your linux experiences, right?</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 18:47:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/swap-using-non-lvm-type-disk/m-p/4182179#M322570</guid>
      <dc:creator>Torsten.</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-04-17T18:47:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Swap using non-lvm type disk</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/swap-using-non-lvm-type-disk/m-p/4182180#M322571</link>
      <description>I disagree. When you define a device for swap you use the CHARACTER device, to remove any overhead that may be induced by using the block device.&lt;BR /&gt;The onlyu time swap will really impose any great overhead is if you were to use file system swap, and that can REALLY give a performance hit.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Also, the LVM overhead is so small in reality it would also make little difference&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Just my experience&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 19:29:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/swap-using-non-lvm-type-disk/m-p/4182180#M322571</guid>
      <dc:creator>melvyn burnard</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-04-17T19:29:25Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Swap using non-lvm type disk</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/swap-using-non-lvm-type-disk/m-p/4182181#M322572</link>
      <description>My answer is around the same as Mels.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Once you start swapping/deactivating processes  the system performance is so bad that who cares.  Having a little faster disk access is miniscule in regards to the performance hit of swapping in the first place.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Never swap...never have time spent worrying about it.</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 20:04:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-hp-ux/swap-using-non-lvm-type-disk/m-p/4182181#M322572</guid>
      <dc:creator>Tim Nelson</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-04-17T20:04:26Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

