I have a question about the functionallity of swap space. If I am running 10 applications, 1 - 9 being critical, and 10 being a text version of leisure suit larry.. assuming I have the RAM to carry the first 9 applications, will they reside in the faster memory, leaving good old Larry to reside in swap space? only being swapped in when necessary? Or is it arbitrary, the applications being swapped so that my more critical apps are being moved to the slower, HD space. If so, wouldn't adding SWAP space actually reduce the performance of critical apps? Thanks in advance for/.'s infinite wisdom:).
So whos to say a network administrator will obide by the oath of silence? What if (and im sure this never happens...) an administrator doubles as someone who dabbles in others security. Then not only is he securing his network quickly, he's also got access to others, and no one has any idea. I say stick with the open sharing of recognized security flaws.
Slashdot Mirror
Cut off your leg.. then when women see you walking.. just tell them your an amputee.. I bet you get laid more.
I have a question about the functionallity of swap space. If I am running 10 applications, 1 - 9 being critical, and 10 being a text version of leisure suit larry.. assuming I have the RAM to carry the first 9 applications, will they reside in the faster memory, leaving good old Larry to reside in swap space? only being swapped in when necessary? Or is it arbitrary, the applications being swapped so that my more critical apps are being moved to the slower, HD space. If so, wouldn't adding SWAP space actually reduce the performance of critical apps? Thanks in advance for /.'s infinite wisdom :).
So whos to say a network administrator will obide by the oath of silence? What if (and im sure this never happens...) an administrator doubles as someone who dabbles in others security. Then not only is he securing his network quickly, he's also got access to others, and no one has any idea. I say stick with the open sharing of recognized security flaws.