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