From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keld Simonsen Subject: Re: RAID Configuration For New Home Server Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 03:04:20 +0200 Message-ID: <20100606010420.GA26325@rap.rap.dk> References: <6B.E5.17309.334EA0C4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6B.E5.17309.334EA0C4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Leslie Rhorer Cc: 'Mark Knecht' , 'Carlos Mennens' , 'Mdadm' List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Sat, Jun 05, 2010 at 06:56:31PM -0500, Leslie Rhorer wrote: > > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0It's certainly workable. =A0You might consider som= ething other than > > > RAID1 for your swap partition. > >=20 > > Looks reasonable. Some comments: > >=20 >=20 > > 2) I don't use RAID for swap. I let the kernel do that internally. = I > > almost never swap out on my home server so trying to protect that w= ith > > RAID for the few moments I might use it seems like overkill to me. >=20 > I halfway agree. My servers almost never use any significant amount > of swap, and even my workstations only use it very occasionally. The= re have > been instances, however, where the swap has grown to be quite large. = With > that in mind, and given the very small amount he has allocated for sw= ap, one > might suggest a RAID0 array of the areas to be used for swap, or mayb= e an > LVM volume. If you use some mirrored RAID for swap, your system will continue to ru= n, if one of your disks go bad. Then you can replace the faulty disk at a lat= er, and possibly more convenient time. If you do not have RAID, your system will most likely go down, if the s= wap partiion is damaged. best regards keld -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html