Neil Bothwick <n...@digimed.co.uk> writes: > On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 18:22:59 -0500, Rich Freeman wrote: > >> > There's no need to use RAID for swap, it's not like it contains >> > anything of permanent importance. Create a swap partition on each >> > disk and let the kernel use the space as it wants. >> >> So, while I tend not to run swap on RAID, it isn't an uncommon >> approach because if you don't put swap on raid and you have a drive >> failure while the system is running, then you are likely to have a >> kernel panic. Since one of the main goals of RAID is availability, it >> is logical to put swap on RAID. > > That's a point I hadn't considered, but I think I'll leave things as they > are for now. I have three drives with a swap partition on each. My system > uses very little swap as it is, so the chances of one of those drives > failing exactly when something is using that particular drive is pretty > small. There's probably more chance of my winning the lottery...
It seems far more likely for a drive to fail when it is used than when it is not used.
