From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <gentoo-user+bounces-98317-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1MWUZc-0004Qx-HS
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 12:17:28 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E71EAE0765;
Thu, 30 Jul 2009 12:17:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-gx0-f220.google.com (mail-gx0-f220.google.com [209.85.217.220])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9B89E0765
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 12:17:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by gxk20 with SMTP id 20so5885603gxk.10
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 05:17:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references
:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=xkvwAX6JtWHZZ/35o5S7X6v1xQqBFgnEcShZniTDzhs=;
b=cg+gZNC/4ry5FmXbTYl/7zYN+FN1TErVNZ1phKwCmdMOQb4ukzz6csmemCzG4CasiC
9E+otaKoHujJaDmrkxzy31af4a9UF8Dug1L7PJmigoZwZvPeOWmRflcGh8mbs7WRc2x0
J82v+uEU/S0vEv8wuMxdVxmrp+BRccGIXR0Zg=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
b=pYPBIx4ZXIMt+futY0KPmzvRHGgUSlahV0YSUEg9aDcfxp3/upfMnzkqPjlpqt1z89
Iw4o+f+i+Ye+AY/TFQBse8IjmEIKy0L1sUfR0+GISBOFPjihcEqLJo784MmW+IQOIQHu
vKmthULvvrHWNBXL4Qv4d/1svuJ3T76EJFe/o=
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.90.34.11 with SMTP id h11mr864029agh.22.1248956246488; Thu, 30
Jul 2009 05:17:26 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4A708607.3090203@f_philipp.fastmail.net>
References: <49bf44f10907260346y62a6f95dyfda763fceb0bcb39@mail.gmail.com>
<DC239B41-96A3-45F2-B85C-62140E346B43@stellar.eclipse.co.uk>
<49bf44f10907270544i5a5922ddo28d6a2c23d7ed6a8@mail.gmail.com>
<4A6DE730.90103@f_philipp.fastmail.net>
<49bf44f10907281052l184efbacvffd7fa1344ddbd2e@mail.gmail.com>
<C20F6FFC-5600-4BF6-BF12-01E793709215@stellar.eclipse.co.uk>
<49bf44f10907290820k1bbf0ebct8ca7becceda19771@mail.gmail.com>
<4A708607.3090203@f_philipp.fastmail.net>
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 05:17:26 -0700
Message-ID: <49bf44f10907300517m40c7c7b5u4305dfa375ce920@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} SSD instead of RAID1?
From: Grant <emailgrant@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Archives-Salt: aa64f502-2504-4df9-b4de-9e8948896904
X-Archives-Hash: 8696e2cce174328903f9c17316c66982
>>>> Is cost-savings the advantage of using CF instead of SSD? =A0It sounds
>>>> like it might be wiser to spend a little more (low capacity SSD drives
>>>> are pretty cheap now) and have a real storage device that doesn't need
>>>> an adapter and is much faster, can swap, etc.
>>> I assumed that you're looking at =A3100 or more for an SSD, as opposed =
to <
>>> =A310 for a CF card. I didn't check those prices, however.
>>>
>>> Are SSDs really *that* much better than CF cards in terms of write cycl=
es?
>>> (i.e. swap)
>>> How much swap are you actually using?
>>>
>>> If the box is just a NAS, then I can't see the speed of the system driv=
e is
>>> an issue *at all*.
>>
>> They're actually workstations so I don't think I should neglect the
>> performance aspect. =A0Should this scheme keep the system running if the
>> HD fails?
>>
>> / SSD
>> /boot SSD
>> /home HD
>> swap HD
>>
>
> No. As I pointed out in one of my earlier posts, you can't put swap on
> the HD. It would certainly crash the system when the disk fails.
>
> Better make sure that these systems have that much RAM that they don't
> need a swap-partition. Alternatively, buy a decent SSD, not a cheap one,
> and swap on that.
OK, that's right. How can I find out if 4GB RAM (the current amount)
is enough? From what I understand of how Linux handles memory, it
will fill it up as quickly as possible, and then free it as necessary.
This makes it difficult to determine how much RAM is necessary from
watching top.
I read on this list that the kernel needs *some* swap, even just a
tiny amount, to function properly. Is that true? If so, do you think
it would be OK to put this tiny amount of swap on a cheap SSD?
- Grant