Why is the recommended size of the pup_save file 512 MB?

[jhsu]

I have frugally reinstalled Puppy Linux, and it's now running smoothly, and my settings save. I am using a 2-partition setup, a 256 MB swap partition at the end and a bootable ext2 partition occupying everything else. I thank everyone who helped me and enlightened me in earlier threads.

However, one thing still puzzles me. Why is 512 MB recommended as the size for the pup_save file? Why wouldn't it be better to use a smaller pup_save file that would take up less space and load up more quickly? Why would the pup_save file need the full 512MB? On the other hand, how do you know that 512MB is enough? How do you know you won't need 1024MB or even more?

[rcrsn51]

A pup_save file does not "load up". It is not copied into memory. Instead, the filesystem stored inside it is merged with the rest of the Puppy file structure. Any files that you add or change are immediately updated on your hard drive.

The 512 MB number is just a happy medium. If you start adding other software, you can quickly fill up a small savefile.

[puppyluvr]

Hello,
My Pupsave for Transitions 3.01 is 3gb...
You`d be surprised how fast you can find cool stuff to fill it up....
I have one game alone that is 1gb....

[Pizzasgood]

How do you know you won't need 1024MB or even more?

You don't need to know. You can increase it as needed later on: Menu->Utility->Resize personal storage file

You do have to do a reboot for it to take effect, but it's simple enough.

[DaveS]

Did I read somewhere that Puppy gets unstable with a save file bigger than 1.8GIG?

[John Doe]

Did I read somewhere that Puppy gets unstable with a save file bigger than 1.8GIG?

If you did, I think they might have run a poor test at the very least.

I've been up over 2GIG more than a few times with no problems.

[DaveS]

Did I read somewhere that Puppy gets unstable with a save file bigger than 1.8GIG?

If you did, I think they might have run a poor test at the very least.

I've been up over 2GIG more than a few times with no problems.

Interesting. I have been saving stuff like audio/photo outside the save file to keep it small. Perhaps I should not worry.

[John Doe]

Interesting. I have been saving stuff like audio/photo outside the save file to keep it small. Perhaps I should not worry.

No, that's good practice.

Always a good idea to consider one's save file "expendable".

I was just commenting on the term stability.

[rjbrewer]

A good thing to keep in mind.
When I first learned to do a frugal install I had a large audio file
downloaded. Some days later I deleted the file (trash>delete), but no longer had that much space left in the pup-save. Watched in amazement as free wound down to 0, flashing red and other warnings!
Fun to watch, but did have to reinstall.

[mikeb]

I treat my pup_save as part of the puppy core and where configs are saved....ie that which would be included when remastering...another way to see it is that part that could be backed up to preserve your 'system' (and the joy of a frugal cd/hdd setup is that it is easier to fix and safer to experiment on)
Everything else...storage..common large applications etc are outside.
My pup_save I always make 256mb...anything smaller and remastering seemed to fail (?) and larger I never needed.

With a thumb drive install on the other hand I can see a good case for making the save file nearly as large as the space available as the method of storage usage is quite different.

There is no optimum size..it really does depend on your particular setup...hence the choice of sizes and option to increase. I've used a 20mB save_file for one tight setup.
And yes size doesn't matter in terms of speed except during the initial creation.

regards

mike