On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Phil Schaffner wrote:
>> R P Herrold wrote:
>>> On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Ned Slider wrote:
>>>> unknown prior wrote ...
>>>> There's always going to be an argument about whether to
>>>> put /boot and swap on RAID. It's all about performance
>>>> most of the time being slightly better versus stability
>>>> in the event of device failure.
>>> I can't think of a good argument for not having /boot on the raid1.
>> Then you do not support it, and see the recurring support load
>> in #centos -- we get this load all the time.
...
> That's pretty much what the article started with if you follow the long
> history of the first thread on the contribution, but the consensus of
> the people who commented was overwhelmingly in favor of /boot on RAID1,
...
My response was simply in reply to the 'I can't think of a
good argument' comment by 'Ned Slider'.
To respond to 'the consensus ... overwhelmingly' remark, the
mice also overwhelmingly voted to bell the cat. Counting
noses does not make a bad answer more correct; using raid
rather than flat RO /boot partitions is still less robust
> so that's where it is now. Would be glad to add a footnote
> with your POV, or feel free to do so yourself.
No, when it irritates me enough that the clueless newbies who
don't read and don't research are not helped by yet another
writeup not to read, and keep coming back for spoons, I may
add a Method B subsection. Or more likely ignore what I
consider a bad support method and point to our rebuild of
upstreams doc's
I remain unconvinced that replicating documentation, and
adding places for entropy to rot in a wiki is a win. I'd
upstream the change, instead, as there is NO CentOS specific
aspect here.
-- Russ herrold
