Register a domain and help support LQ
Go Back > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.


  Search this Thread
Old 02-08-2013, 04:05 AM   #1
Registered: Nov 2006
Location: Europe,Latvia,Riga
Distribution: slackware,slax, Mac OS X, exMandriva
Posts: 480

Rep: Reputation: 56
swap partition size regarding to kernel panic ?

I last days i reading a lot information about creating software RAID 1 massives under linux, and in one document in russian ( looks it translate from english, but not contains any link to original) i found advice to create swap partition with minimum size of RAM *1.25, because, as they wrote, in such a kernel panic, for all ram amount must be entire on swap partition, because if not, can be data damage in next partition space on HDD.... ( it means, when encaounter a kernel panic situation, kernel puts all RAM contain to swap file / partition).
can anyone, who is close with "how kernel works in low level", comment this? it is a real thing, or myth?

Last edited by WiseDraco; 02-08-2013 at 04:06 AM.
Old 02-08-2013, 04:23 PM   #2
LQ Veteran
Registered: Aug 2003
Location: Australia
Distribution: Lots ...
Posts: 13,843

Rep: Reputation: 1453Reputation: 1453Reputation: 1453Reputation: 1453Reputation: 1453Reputation: 1453Reputation: 1453Reputation: 1453Reputation: 1453Reputation: 1453
Myth - absolute rubbish.
In a panic, the contents of memory are not (usually) written anywhere - all processing effectively just "stops". It is possible to configure things like kdump to write out dumps, but even that won't write over the current swap partition.
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 02-09-2013, 08:55 AM   #3
Registered: Jan 2012
Location: Directly above the center of the earth
Distribution: Slackware. There's something else?
Posts: 383

Rep: Reputation: 71
Ever since I've had systems with 1GB or more of RAM, I've stopped adding a swap partition and never had a problem yet. I don't know though if the fs one uses would make any difference, but I've been a firm believer (and it's paid off many, many times!) in reiserfs...just in case that happens to come up for any reason.
Old 02-10-2013, 06:19 AM   #4
Registered: Nov 2006
Location: Europe,Latvia,Riga
Distribution: slackware,slax, Mac OS X, exMandriva
Posts: 480

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 56
2 syg00: thanks for clarification.
2 irgunII: i found, even small swapspace enabled do system work better. after i installed slack14 32bit on my home desktop with 3 gb ram, i do with commented swap in fstab, but sometimes after a few hours work ( i use kde) it strangely lost network settings ( ip address). maybe its not chained, but after that i enable swap space, and computer looks like work a bit better. simply me own opinion...


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Size of the swap partition Nitram Linux - Newbie 5 12-04-2007 06:05 AM
Best practice size for Swap partition Garp Linux - General 7 01-18-2006 06:32 AM
Swap Partition Size Murdock1979 Slackware 11 07-27-2005 02:09 AM
swap partition size alaios Linux - General 4 09-27-2004 02:21 PM
swap partition size? Toker Linux - Newbie 16 10-12-2003 12:19 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:21 AM.

Main Menu
Write for LQ is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration