I have been setting up Zram, Swap, Swappiness and EasyOOM daemon on 16gb ram boxes, or lower. Someone asked me about 32gb of ram, or more, and I’m unsure. Wondering if others have experimented with this!

  • PetteriPano@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    zram makes sense if you do not have swap.

    zswap is probably enabled by default in most distros. It compresses cold pages on the fly so that they’re ready to quickly get swapped in and out.

    I do hit the swap partition occasionally on my 32GB systems.

    It doesn’t really kick in until you have proper pressure. I want my swap partition for hibernation, anyway.

  • monovergent@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 hours ago

    My workstation has 48 GB RAM with 50% allocation allowed to zram, no disk swapping. It works just fine. Once I use up the majority of my RAM, it kicks in the same way it would on any other system with less RAM.

      • monovergent@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        What about it? I see it kicking in at least 10 GB before my RAM is full and I haven’t noticed any fundamental differences between how zram works on my 48 GB workstation and my 8 GB devices. Maybe I’ve never had a workload that filled all 48 GB + extra zram capacity, but it’s never given me an issue.

  • Eggymatrix@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Genuinely curious: what are you doing to be needing this?

    I cannot think of any modern usecase for swap a part from hybernation

    • amorangi@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Local AI can chew it up. Wasn’t able to run certain jobs on 64Gb until I switched to zswap.

    • Outsider9042@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Compiling Librewollf with a sufficient number of jobs is a great way to eat up 32GB of RAM, and the some.

    • kiol@discuss.onlineOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 hours ago

      I’ve been using lower ram machines lately, so made me curious about if people are using things like zram with 32gb+

  • ISO@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Why do you think 32GiB is special compared to 16GiB?
    And wtf is EasyOOM?

    You maximize the usefulness of zram by actually increasing sappiness, and giving zram devices high priority. e.g.

    sysctl vm.swappiness=100
    
    for i in {1..8}; do
      swapon /dev/zram${i} -p 32767
    done
    

    Then you enable other swap devices with lower priority.

    This is the way regardless of how much RAM you have. I mean, it may be pointless if you never ever exceed, let’s say 10/32GiB (including caching). But it still wouldn’t be harmful in any way.

    • non_burglar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      That isn’t how swappiness works.

      Changing the sysctl for swappiness only adjusts the ratio of anonymous and file pages, it doesn’t set a “threshold” or “aggressivity” in swapping pages, nor does it dictate how much or how little to swap.

      It’s generally ill-advised to touch swappiness at all unless you know what you’re doing. You can start here.

      If you’re going to hand out free advice, at least make sure the advice is worth the price of admission.

      • ISO@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        If you’re going to hand out free advice, at least make sure the advice is worth the price of admission.

        This is very ironic, considering your comment is a mix of straw man and wrong.

      • ISO@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Oh, you wrote “easy” not “early” in OP. In any case, this looks stupid. But to each their own, I guess.