Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 15:38:04 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 15:37:42 -0500 Received: from mauve.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.38]:26872 "EHLO mauve.csi.cam.ac.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 15:37:37 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" From: James A Sutherland To: "G . Sumner Hayes" , =?iso-8859-15?q?Fran=E7ois=20Cami?= Subject: Re: Swap vs No Swap. Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 20:37:20 +0000 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.1] Cc: Rik van Riel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20011122143639.A2964@forceovermass.com> In-Reply-To: <20011122143639.A2964@forceovermass.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 22 November 2001 7:36 pm, G . Sumner Hayes wrote: > On Thu, Nov 22, 2001 at 08:17:43PM +0100, Fran?ois Cami wrote: > > James A Sutherland wrote: > > > Hmm... if you've experimented with this, how does this setup compare > > > to a striped RAID of hda+hdc used for root and swap? (i.e. is the > > > speedup down to splitting accesses between two spindles?) > > > > I haven't, but it's a good idea, I may give it a try, but not very soon. > > You shouldn't need striping for this--if you have two swap partitions > with equal priority, the kernel will "stripe" them itself. > > At least that's my understanding. It'll stripe the SWAP area, but not the root FS; what I'm interested in is how performance is affected by splitting both across two devices, compared to putting one on each. James. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/