Burgholzer, Robert (DEQ) wrote:
> OK, thanks to multiple folks for letting me know that I was looking at
> the wrong "top" metric. That said, my performance in most definitely
> suffering -- does this "swap" number seem excessive (looks like ~100 G
> to me):
> Swap: 102399992k total
Total swap isn't an issue (except maybe in wasted disk - that *does*
seem *very* high). It's the next column over (swap used) that you need
to keep an eye on.
-kgd
