But… Why? If ZRam uses RAM as compressed swap, what advantage does it have over just leaving that RAM available as shared memory? Do you have a specific process that is eating up non-shared? This might be of interest: https://chrisdown.name/2026/03/24/zswap-vs-zram-when-to-use-what.html
You get more ram for very little slow down, that also, would rarely be the bottleneck. For the servers, ram is a constraint, and it’s all just selfhosting. I have a Raspberry Pi that I selfhost with, as well as a couple 10 dollar compute instances in the cloud. More ram is much better than the tiny slow down that might occur during compression or decompression. All my services are all still very snappy, even the mailserver. For my work, I bring up large docker sandboxes of services that I need running to test entire systems. In the past, I would just allocate 32GB to a swapfile. ZRam is way faster.
Why not just set kernel swappiness to 1 and not do any of that?
Because I want to encourage more swapping, not less.
But… Why? If ZRam uses RAM as compressed swap, what advantage does it have over just leaving that RAM available as shared memory? Do you have a specific process that is eating up non-shared? This might be of interest: https://chrisdown.name/2026/03/24/zswap-vs-zram-when-to-use-what.html
You get more ram for very little slow down, that also, would rarely be the bottleneck. For the servers, ram is a constraint, and it’s all just selfhosting. I have a Raspberry Pi that I selfhost with, as well as a couple 10 dollar compute instances in the cloud. More ram is much better than the tiny slow down that might occur during compression or decompression. All my services are all still very snappy, even the mailserver. For my work, I bring up large docker sandboxes of services that I need running to test entire systems. In the past, I would just allocate 32GB to a swapfile. ZRam is way faster.