Swap space questions

[disciple]

Here's some questions for someone:

It is sometimes said that the main advantage of a "full install" of Puppy is that there is more available ram because there is no .sfs loaded into ram. But if the .sfs is loaded into ram it will be moved to swap when you start needing more ram, won't it?
When you do something that requires accessing the .sfs (e.g. starting a program), will the whole .sfs be moved back into ram? (If not, then there is no advantage...)

[RetroTechGuy]

Here's some questions for someone:

It is sometimes said that the main advantage of a "full install" of Puppy is that there is more available ram because there is no .sfs loaded into ram. But if the .sfs is loaded into ram it will be moved to swap when you start needing more ram, won't it?
When you do something that requires accessing the .sfs (e.g. starting a program), will the whole .sfs be moved back into ram? (If not, then there is no advantage...)

I did a frugal install of Lupu 520, and noticed that it does not load the .sfs file (I don't recall if it does so if you boot from CD, and have both a .sfs and lupusave on the HDD). I was happy to see that change. I always thought that the only time it should load to memory is if the only .sfs exists on the CD (as CD drives tend to be very slow).

Edit: Here's my free memory under lupu520, frugal install on my HDD:

• total used free shared buffers
  Mem: 969868 137932 831936 0 2152
  Swap: 1228964 0 1228964
  Total: 2198832 137932 2060900

Running 137MB without Firefox loaded (Firefox eats a lot of memory).

Conversely, 4.3.1 always seem to do load the .sfs, even if you tried to turn it off...