Bug 78201
| Summary: | Swap advice seems wrong | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Retired] Red Hat Linux | Reporter: | Alan Cox <alan> |
| Component: | anaconda | Assignee: | Michael Fulbright <msf> |
| Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Mike McLean <mikem> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | high | ||
| Version: | 9 | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | i386 | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2003-05-25 14:50:24 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Alan Cox
2002-11-19 23:40:42 UTC
We asked Michael Johnson about this for 8.0 and he indicated we should leave it in. For systems with less than 192MB RAM + existing we'll need to do something or the upgrade will fail. For 256MB RAM or more we could disable the warning. Does that sound adequate? Makes sense The constraint nowdays isnt swap = max(2*RAM, current, needed_swap) its just swap = max(current, needed_swap) So for < 256Mb you probably do want plenty of swap with openorifice, nastilus and evolution involved Done. I'm going through Bugzilla closing some bugs that have been marked as Modified for some period of time. I believe that most of these issues have been fixed, so I'm resolving these bugs as Rawhide. If the bug you are seeing still exists, please reopen this report and mark it as Reopened. |