LinuxQuestions.org
Download your favorite Linux distribution at LQ ISO.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 12-29-2013, 01:08 PM   #46
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Main: Gentoo Others: What fits the task
Posts: 15,592
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047

Quote:
Originally Posted by 273 View Post
What? At least 100GB? I've a kitchen-sink install of Debian (the king of dependency installers) using 17.3GB of a 30GB drive. 100GB is pointless -- I do concede it may not really be missed from a 1TB drive but anything over 20GB is assuming a deliberate attempt to install everything and anything over 30GB is displaying a perverse will to make 99% of people's root partition look small.
Again, it depends on your use case. If you don't have a separate /tmp, but handle very large files (or a large number of smaller files) in your workload in /tmp, 100GB may be appropriate for /, while for the usual desktop/laptop it is not.
 
Old 12-30-2013, 09:23 AM   #47
ericson007
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Location: Japan
Distribution: CentOS 6.5
Posts: 482

Rep: Reputation: 85
Ok, so just some rough figures. But my system is a i5 2500 with 5tb in disks, non raid, and 24gb ram. Now it is mainly used as a kvm host for servers replicated on an equivalent machine. Running 3 vms with 4gb allocated to each, it leaves 12gb ram for the system. But still, while extracting large files, it is not uncommon to have top indicate about 300mb free. Ofcourse most of it can be reused since a lot if it is cached files, but at times swap can still run up to about 1.3gigs.

Performance doesn't suffer and procs util is well within limits. So allowing ample swap isn't an issue.

Monitor performance. If it gets slow. Adjust swap accordingly. But more ram does not mean less swap required.

Just a typical output of top

Code:
top - 10:16:42 up 1 day,  9:51,  2 users,  load average: 1.36, 0.43, 0.14
Tasks: 242 total,   2 running, 240 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
Cpu0  : 11.5%us,  3.1%sy,  0.0%ni, 54.2%id, 31.3%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si,  0.0%st
Cpu1  : 19.3%us, 20.1%sy,  0.0%ni, 36.6%id, 24.0%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si,  0.0%st
Cpu2  : 16.3%us, 16.1%sy,  0.0%ni, 27.1%id, 40.4%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si,  0.0%st
Cpu3  :  7.7%us,  7.1%sy,  0.0%ni, 64.0%id, 21.2%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si,  0.0%st
Mem:  24554616k total, 24365936k used,   188680k free,  1171488k buffers
Swap: 10207224k total,   906544k used,  9300680k free, 16462432k cached
free on the other hand

Code:
free
             total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
Mem:      24554616   24333872     220744          0    1171664   16388632
-/+ buffers/cache:    6773576   17781040
Swap:     10207224     906936    9300288
so as you can see even though the system is digging into swap, the system is still performing as it should. This is running 2 server virtual machines and 1 generel virtual router with only the router having a nic directly assigned. The rest uses paravirtualized drivers.

So as you can see if this system sufferes a slow down (with the previos output, that is with 3 kvm machines started up at the same time), it is more likely to be an issue with the i/o system or directly the hard disks since the cpu util is mostly bogged down waiting on disks. Even though ram is low in terms of that available, almost 18gigs are cached files that can be freed when required. So even though my swap is 10 gigs, I have never seen it go up more than 1.5 gig on this small scale system.

In my case when I experience issues, I will upgrade the disks first, maybe put them in a striped raid array if it gets slow again after that, I will update to something like the intel I350 4port nics and throw 2 in, one per pcie x 16 and make use of the SR-IOV to directly assign a port per virtual machine. That should be cheaper than just buying a new computer. So there is a real world example, this machine is used for a small business, now it is pretty low on usage because no one is logged in remotely etc since it is holidays. Sure, it is not an enterprise system, just plain desktop hardware, but the hardware does a great job for a small business.

Raid is not used, because whe have the virtual machines and configurations databases etc cloned every night to a different machine and remote server so, in case of something bad happens, it is just a matter of reprovisioning the disk image on an alternative hard disk.

Last edited by ericson007; 12-30-2013 at 08:49 PM.
 
Old 12-30-2013, 12:12 PM   #48
enorbet
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Distribution: Slackware 14 is Main OpSys on Main PC, 2ndary are OpenSuSe 13 and SolydK
Posts: 708

Rep: Reputation: 308Reputation: 308Reputation: 308Reputation: 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericson007 View Post
Ok, so just some rough figures. But my system is a i5 2500 with 5tb in disks, non raid, and 24gb ram. Now it is mainly used as a kvm host for servers replicated on an equivalent machine. Running 3 vms with 4gb allocated to each, it leaves 12gb ram for the system. But still, while extracting large files, it is not uncommon to have top indicate about 300mb free. Ofcourse most of it can be reused since a lot if it is cached files, but at times swap can still run up to about 1.3gigs.

Performance doesn't suffer and procs util is well within limits. So allowing ample swap isn't an issue.

Monitor performance. If it gets slow. Adjust swap accordingly. But more ram does not mean less swap required.
Good general practice point. I'm afraid I had to be reminded that we aren't always talking about just desktops or simple servers here
 
  


Reply


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
Recommended Partition Sizes Zaileion Linux - Newbie 13 11-19-2013 06:55 PM
Recommended filesystems sizes ? Vilius Red Hat 5 05-15-2008 07:41 AM
Recommended filesystem sizes using LVM ? Vilius Linux - Software 3 05-15-2008 06:48 AM
Recommended Partition Sizes vmanivan Slackware - Installation 4 08-17-2005 04:53 AM
recommended partitions/sizes for manual part. redhat install. iLLuSionZ Linux - Newbie 15 11-15-2003 05:37 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:00 PM.

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