David Neilson said: > Yes, the intent of original question was to use raid-1 to mirror swap so > if one disk crashed, the system would not go down. Are there any negative > or hidden ramifications with swapping on raid-1 on RH7.2?
have you tested your raid1 ? I have only had 1 failure with software raid 1 on linux out of about 10 arrays. And when it failed the system went with it. IMO, the point of software raid is to protect data, not protect uptime. Data can still be lost due to unclean unmount and stuff, but much of the data would be intact. The one failure I had was on an IDE system, haven't had any failures on a SCSI system with software raid(yet). Though I have had a system crash on a system with software SCSI raid, the disk that was having trouble was not part of the raid array, and was overheating, causing massive SCSI bus errors, system crashed several times while trying to troubleshoot it. I have even had hardware raid 10 (3ware 6800 series) take down a system when a disk(1 out of 6) dies. That happened everytime a disk failed. system would immediately kernel panic. I would not trust software raid on a system that seems to be as "vital" as yours seems to be. go with a hardware SCSI raid controller with SCA hotswap drives. I have had more then 30 IDE disk failures in the past couple of years, my SCSI disk failures have been a fraction, 1 or 2 drives. I have had about twice as many IDE disks in use as SCSI. and absolutely, under no circumstances rely on IDE for such storage, it is so incredibly unreliable it's sick, even with RAID. the reliability of IDE disks has gone down the toilet in the past 2 years. nate -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
