Linux Performs Poorly In Low RAM / Memory Pressure Situations On The Desktop

[JerryMungo]

.

 

[CT_Biker]

Does the Kernel make use of caching when using low amounts of memory in Single Channel?
I noticed that when I upgraded my laptops RAM and HDD to SSD that it never used Swap space and made use of memory caching a lot more - am I the only one who noticed this?

Also even more lightweight versions of popular distros never fared well with low amounts of memory.

 

[ponder]

I suspect the reduction of swap use on SSD relates to enhancing the lifespan of the SSD, I could be wrong.

I speak under correction but I don't think the kernel cares whether the swap partition is on a hdd or ssd.

 

[CT_Biker]

I suspect the reduction of swap use on SSD relates to enhancing the lifespan of the SSD, I could be wrong.

That was my thought as well, but I set swappiness to 100, still refused to make use of it.

Hence why I suspect it’s caching on RAM instead

 

[CT_Biker]

Here is an article on how Linux tries to use RAM to cache system tasks for reuse or later use - this is a helpful performance optimization that is baked into Linux

Chapter 5. Memory Usage and Page Cache | Tuning and Optimizing Red Hat Enterprise Linux for Oracle 9i and 10g Databases | Red Hat Enterprise Linux | 5 | Red Hat Documentation

Chapter 5. Memory Usage and Page Cache | Tuning and Optimizing Red Hat Enterprise Linux for Oracle 9i and 10g Databases | Red Hat Enterprise Linux | 5 | Red Hat Documentation

access.redhat.com

 

[newby_investor]

Not having a SWAP partition on a Linux box in my experience makes the thing very confused. Even if it doesn't use the partition extensively, it's like a comfort blanket.

I personally have never had problems with machines with low RAM. That being said - the first commenter on that Slashdot post is right - even a monster computer can be brought to its knees by a front-end web developer too excited to strut his stuff. Opening a browser opens you to a world of hurt. They're RAM fiends these days.

 

[rambo919]

I suspect the reduction of swap use on SSD relates to enhancing the lifespan of the SSD, I could be wrong.

I speak under correction but I don't think the kernel cares whether the swap partition is on a hdd or ssd.

The system itself does not care whether it's a spinning disk or SSD, the common recommendation is to never put a swap file on a SSD though to extend it's lifespan.

For the same reason windows automatically disables system restore when it's installed on a SSD.... why you can't just have a seperate system restore partition on another HDD or SD card though is beyond me.....

I have generally noticed that moderm linux systems almost do not use the swap partition or when they do you get hard stalls, it's infuriating.

 

[Crumbl0x]

The system itself does not care whether it's a spinning disk or SSD, the common recommendation is to never put a swap file on a SSD though to extend it's lifespan.

For the same reason windows automatically disables system restore when it's installed on a SSD.... why you can't just have a seperate system restore partition on another HDD or SD card though is beyond me.....

I have generally noticed that moderm linux systems almost do not use the swap partition or when they do you get hard stalls, it's infuriating.

except that this is outdated advice, you would have to write 50-60GB, per day, every day, to the swapfile / partition on a modern SSD before it would reach its EOL in 15 years, which is extremely unlikely to happen given that other factors that would cause the SSD's detriment would happen first.
On the basis of Windows disabling the recovery system restore, eh whatever if it's true, I'm just glad they don't allow SSDs to be defragmented.

 

[marco]

Microsoft disabled system restore when the update got too large for the SSD's at the time. Most were 32GB and just large enough to download the major updates.
Sadly this is no longer the case as even with no restore it just does not fit.