From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 27 05:48:31 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 220E016A4D4 for ; Sat, 27 Nov 2004 05:48:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from lakermmtao07.cox.net (lakermmtao07.cox.net [68.230.240.32]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AB5A43D49 for ; Sat, 27 Nov 2004 05:48:30 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from paul@gromit.dlib.vt.edu) Received: from [192.168.0.100] (really [68.110.143.167]) by lakermmtao07.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.03.04 201-2131-111-106-20040729) with ESMTP id <20041127054829.TLUW20686.lakermmtao07.cox.net@[192.168.0.100]>; Sat, 27 Nov 2004 00:48:29 -0500 Message-ID: <41A8152D.8080008@gromit.dlib.vt.edu> Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 00:48:29 -0500 From: Paul Mather User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (Windows/20041103) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brian Szymanski References: <41A45A3F.5010008@anduin.net> <20041124171115.GP7232@darkness.comp.waw.pl> <6579E984-3E47-11D9-9576-000D9335BCEC@anduin.net> <20041125101405.GB7690@kevad.internal> <41A5B95F.3060605@withagen.nl> <2313.10.0.0.120.1101461554.squirrel@10.0.0.120> <16807.16193.988781.903136@canoe.dclg.ca> <1656.10.0.0.26.1101532508.squirrel@10.0.0.26> In-Reply-To: <1656.10.0.0.26.1101532508.squirrel@10.0.0.26> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: graid3 - requirements or manpage wrong? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 05:48:31 -0000 Brian Szymanski wrote: >As for the swap: why would you want to do that? It was my understanding >that the kernel load balanced swap requests across drives? > > You'd want to do it not for load-balancing but for fault tolerance. With a RAID 1/3/5 setup you could have a drive fail and still have swapping (and hence the system) continue to work. That's not the same as (or true of) having multiple swap partitions with the system balancing load over all of them. Cheers, Paul.