On Thu, 8 May 2003 cpace@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
> First, I noticed that you put the swap partition last and I have seen
> this before. I was always under the impression it was better to put
> it first because if you utilize swap, you want the seek/search to be
> as fast as possible and therefore would put it in the beginning of the
> partition.
You're most likely going to use the swap partition very little. If you're
using it heavily that means you are running out of physical memory.
Also, you don't know where the head is going to be when you want to write
to the swap so you can't make assumptions about how fast it will be to get
there.
> Second, is there any recourse in speed for putting swap as a logical
> partition? I might be confused on differences between logical and
> primary partitions and hence the question.
The only different between primary and extended partitions in the name
(for most intents and purposes). It used to be that there was only
support for 4 partitions, but someone came up with a way to add more. For
backwards support, they just made you take one of your primary partitions
and put all the data on there for the extended partitions.
On my drives I create two primary partitions. The first one holds the
swap and the second is where all my extended partitions live. You don't
necessarily *have* to use up all your primary partition slots and methinks
you could actually get away with using *none*, so it's a matter of choice
how you do it.
Paul Braman
aeon@tampabay.rr.com
P.S. Anyone is more than willing to correct my skewed view of history on
partitions, but I'm just trying to be general. :)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 19:39:40 EDT