On Mon, 25 Sep 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > this is fixed in 2.4. The 2.2 RAID code is frozen, and has known
> > limitations (ie. due to the above RAID1 cannot be used as a swap-device).
> as commonly patched in by RedHat? Should I instead use a swap file
> for a machine that should be fault-tolerant against a drive failure?
the answer is yes. RAID5 will not deadlock due to VM problems, but RAID5
might have other problems if the device is being reconstructed *and* used
for swap.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: the new VM Stephen C. Tweedie
- Re: the new VM Andrea Arcangeli
- Re: the new VM Rik van Riel
- Re: the new VM Christoph Rohland
- Re: the new VM Rik van Riel
- Re: the new VM Christoph Rohland
- Re: the new VM Ingo Molnar
- Re: the new VM Andrea Arcangeli
- Re: the new VM Ingo Molnar
- Swap on RAID; was: Re: the new VM parsley
- Re: the new VM Ingo Molnar
- Re: the new VM Ingo Molnar
- Re: the new VM Andrea Arcangeli
- Re: the new VM Ingo Molnar
- Re: the new VM Andrea Arcangeli
- Re: [patch] vmfixes-2.4.0-test9-B2 Andrea Arcangeli
- Re: [patch] vmfixes-2.4.0-test9-B2 Alexander Viro
- Re: [patch] vmfixes-2.4.0-test9-B2 Andrea Arcangeli
- Re: [patch] vmfixes-2.4.0-test9-B2 Alexander Viro
- Re: [patch] vmfixes-2.4.0-test9-B2 Stephen C. Tweedie
- Re: [patch] vmfixes-2.4.0-test9-B2 Ingo Molnar

