Matthias Bethke [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Thu, 14 Aug 2008 00:54:48 +0200:
I have two 500G disks, mirrored in a software-RAID0 on all partitions
but swap which is on two separate 16G partitions.
OK, if it's RAID-0, it's striped, not mirrored, and you have
andrew [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:38:52 -0400:
No, this is incorrect. emerge -f --resume does not cross packages off
the resume list.
What you want to do should work properly.
Hmm. New to me! (Obviously.) =8^)
--
Duncan - List
Duncan wrote:
andrew [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:38:52 -0400:
No, this is incorrect. emerge -f --resume does not cross packages off
the resume list.
What you want to do should work properly.
Hmm. New to me! (Obviously.) =8^)
Mark Haney wrote:
Hmm. New to me! (Obviously.) =8^)
Well I'll give it a shot and let you know what happens. :)
Yep, I could do an 'emerge -f --resume' and have it fetch the files
without trouble, then an 'emerge --resume' gets me right back where I
needed to be with the resume.
Duncan wrote:
But you're correct about swap, at least if you have them set at the same
priority. The kernel will automatically stripe across all swap
partitions set at the same priority, so if you have multiple disks, put a
swap partition on each and set the priority equal (in fstab if you
Hi Duncan,
on Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 08:07:40AM +, you wrote:
I have two 500G disks, mirrored in a software-RAID0 on all partitions
but swap which is on two separate 16G partitions.
OK, if it's RAID-0, it's striped, not mirrored, and you have NO
redundancy at all. If either of those
Hi Richard,
on Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 02:08:26PM -0400, you wrote:
Note that in such a situation if either disk fails you're likely to end up
with a panic when your swap device isn't accessible. If uptime is a
concern mirrored swap is better (but slower).
Of course, if you're running on
Richard Freeman [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Thu, 14 Aug 2008
14:08:26 -0400:
Duncan wrote:
But you're correct about swap[...] at the same priority
Note that in such a situation if either disk fails you're likely to end
up with a panic when your swap
