Re: Re: ENBD and swap

I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you a lot for the quick
response (happened last time I went here as well, the support you give
for ENBD really is excellent and is appriciated), and for highlighting
some of the problems.

This concludes the discussion for me. The rest of this email isn't
important and can be skipped if you like.

> But why not "just do that"? I know what you want it for - why repeat?

Sorry about that.

> around them - use 1KB blocksize and good duplex cabling. A 100BT
> switch should take care of it.

Fine for my own needs...

What I'm trying to discuss is the direction of the main LTSP
development. Whether a 100 BT switch would take care of it is irrelevant
then - what matters is that any new LTSP version could be taken in use
in the hundreds of existing LTSP networks already out there (backwards
compatability).

> There is no reason to use more than 32MB of memory!  I run my X
> terminal (a 486sx50) on 8MB.

The experiences of LTSP users worldwide suggests otherwise (and I
personally had a client chrash about once a month until I enabled swap).
Whether it could be worked around by hardware solutions (or by
reconfiguring some apps to run on server to free up memory, or whatever)
is not really relevant - the present situation is that network swap is
used by LTSP users, and the dependency on it blocks upgrading the kernel
in LTSP.

(I should state at this point that I am myself just an ordinary LTSP
user - however I did go here to find answer for the LTSP mailing list,
discussing the direction of swapping in all of LTSP).

// Dag Sverre