From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5609DC43334 for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 18:20:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230077AbiFXSU4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jun 2022 14:20:56 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48212 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229844AbiFXSU4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jun 2022 14:20:56 -0400 Received: from rin.romanrm.net (rin.romanrm.net [IPv6:2001:bc8:2dd2:1000::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2EEC53A4D for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 11:20:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nvm (nvm2.home.romanrm.net [IPv6:fd39::4a:3cff:fe57:d6b5]) by rin.romanrm.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 7778C5C1; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 18:20:51 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2022 23:20:49 +0500 From: Roman Mamedov To: Pascal Hambourg Cc: Wols Lists , o1bigtenor , Linux-RAID Subject: Re: a new install - - - putting the system on raid Message-ID: <20220624232049.502a541e@nvm> In-Reply-To: <1de4bf1f-242b-7d02-23dc-a6d05893db81@plouf.fr.eu.org> References: <81c50899-7edb-e629-3bbc-16cfa8f17e34@youngman.org.uk> <5cbd9dd1-73fc-ce11-4a9d-8752f7bea979@youngman.org.uk> <1de4bf1f-242b-7d02-23dc-a6d05893db81@plouf.fr.eu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 24 Jun 2022 00:27:45 +0200 Pascal Hambourg wrote: > > Raid is meant to protect your data. The benefit for raiding your swap is > > much less, and *should* be negligible. > > No, this is what backup is meant to. RAID does not protect your data > against accidental or malicious deletion or corruption. RAID is meant to > provide availabity. The benefit of having everything including swap on > RAID is that the system as a whole will continue to operate normally > when a drive fails. I think the key decider in whether or not a RAIDed swap should be a must-have, is whether the system has hot-swap bays for drives. Also, it seemed like the discussion began in the context of setting up a home machine, or something otherwise not as mission-critical. And in those cases, almost nobody will have hot-swap. As such, if you have to bring down the machine to replace a drive anyway, might as well tolerate the risk of it going down with a bang (due to a part of swap going away), and enjoy a faster swap on either RAID0 or multiple independent swap zones for the rest of the time. -- With respect, Roman