From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Robin Bowes Subject: Re: RAID5 crash and burn Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 11:26:27 +0000 Message-ID: <4184CBE3.10801@robinbowes.com> References: <1430.63.204.219.3.1099198742.squirrel@63.204.219.3> <200410310518.i9V5ION22004@www.watkins-home.com> <1867.63.204.219.3.1099216777.squirrel@63.204.219.3> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1867.63.204.219.3.1099216777.squirrel@63.204.219.3> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: coreyfro@coreyfro.com Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids coreyfro@coreyfro.com wrote: > About swap failing, would there be much of a performence hit if i mirrored > swap? I don't like running without it, and I don't want to repeat this > incident... My system has more than enough ram for the load it has, but I > under stand the other reasons for having swap, so slow swap is better than > nothing or faulty, i spose... What other reasons are these (genuine question - I'm curious) I've got a box that is in a similar situation - loads of RAM, never anywhere near memory filling up. Currently I've not got swap activated but my disk architecture was created to allow one or two 1.5GB mirrored partitions for swap. R. -- http://robinbowes.com