Re: Path forward for Virtualized Swap?

[Chris Li]

On Tue, Sep 22, 2026 at 5:20 AM Gregory Price <gourry@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2026 at 03:32:44AM -1000, Chris Li wrote:
> > > Right now it has 64GB of memory.
> >
> > That is exactly my point. You are running 1/8 = 12.5% system ram.
> >
>
> Chris you are missing the point
>
> Zswap:           8812236 kB
> Zswapped:       24927876 kB

I am well aware of the point. The 7%-10% data I provided is before
compression. After compression, the real saving is about 1.5% - 2%.

>
> To support this, you'd need to know you were going to get a 3:1
> compression ratio and allocate 24GB of storage (24GB of swap slots).
>
> An hour from now he might run a workload that's 4:1 compressible and
> there would be 32GB zswapped - but if he'd only allocated 24GB of swap
> he'd be limited to 24GB arbitrarily.
>
> On a 1.5 TB server, that number is oppressive.  It's 192GB of
> potentially dead storage space.  At 1 million servers that up to 183
> Petabytes of pointless provisioned flash if you know that most of the
> memory is zswappable.
>
> You're focused on the wrong problem.

You are not listening. The boundary was set due to feedback from the
application SLO. Those are real deployments not imaginary usage.
Please respect the user.

Chris