Michael Tokarev wrote:
Bill Davidsen wrote:
[]
If you use RAID0 on an array it will be faster (usually) than just
partitions, but any process with swapped pages will crash if you lose
either drive. With RAID1 operation will be more reliable but no faster.
If you use RAID10 the array will be
David wrote:
I have two devices mirrored which are partitioned like this:
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 * 633071627915358108+ fd Linux raid
autodetect
/dev/sda2307162807168202920482875 fd Linux raid
autodetect
Bill Davidsen wrote:
[]
If you use RAID0 on an array it will be faster (usually) than just
partitions, but any process with swapped pages will crash if you lose
either drive. With RAID1 operation will be more reliable but no faster.
If you use RAID10 the array will be faster and more reliable,
On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 12:55:57PM +0100, Mogens Kjaer wrote:
If one of your disks fails, and you have pages in the swapfile
on the failing disk, your machine will crash when the pages are
needed again.
IMHO the machine will not crash just the application which the page
belongs to will be
, or is
the correct method to have them as an md with the md initialised as
swap?
Brief details are the same as my previous mails last week: 2.6.15,
mdadm 1.12.0 (on md0, so I can't see that it is at fault).
Thanks,
David
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in
the body
