From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Sep 17 07:34:28 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14E3A106566C for ; Sat, 17 Sep 2011 07:34:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Received: from mx01.qsc.de (mx01.qsc.de [213.148.129.14]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C98E48FC16 for ; Sat, 17 Sep 2011 07:34:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from r56.edvax.de (port-92-195-14-151.dynamic.qsc.de [92.195.14.151]) by mx01.qsc.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A16303CC58; Sat, 17 Sep 2011 09:34:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from r56.edvax.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by r56.edvax.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with SMTP id p8H7YQZp001930; Sat, 17 Sep 2011 09:34:26 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 09:34:26 +0200 From: Polytropon To: "Thomas Mueller In-Reply-To: <20110915100956.14B911065674@hub.freebsd.org> References: <4E70F1FA.1040407@gmail.com> <20110915100956.14B911065674@hub.freebsd.org> Organization: EDVAX X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.1.1 (GTK+ 2.24.5; i386-portbld-freebsd8.2) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 8.2 Partition Sizing question X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Polytropon List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 07:34:28 -0000 On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 10:04:31 +0000 (GMT), Thomas Mueller I can't really see the rationale for putting / and /usr > on separate partitions. The idea is that even if /usr partition gets some problems (e. g. filesystem defects), / will be enough to bring the system up in SUM, and maybe do some backup or recovery in this (limited) state. > I like to put /home on a separate partition, and don't like > the idea of /usr/home. I agree with that. I've also created systems where /home was on a physically different disk, so being fully independent of the OS disk. > I also don't like to put /var and /tmp on separate partitions: > problems with size and fitting the disk space. But that can turn against you: Imagine some user is filling /tmp with big files until the disk is full. Now logs to /var cannot be written anymore. Even operations that go to / can't be successfully finished. On the other hand: If you "connect" /tmp to a file with a static size that is located on /, this problem would not occur. In cases where you can't predict how the usage of /tmp, /var or /usr will develop in the future, putting everything into one partition might be the best solution - expect, of course, using ZFS instead. :-) > Putting /home on a separate partition allows the whole system > to be upgraded, even newfs and reinstall, without touching > user data. Correct, and this can be very useful sometimes. The "second disk approach" even enables you to change partitioning type (fdisk / GPT) and scheme without dealing with the data on the /home disk. Using diffrent partitions allows you to accomodate to differences in UFS formatting options (e. g. inode size to reflect if it will store many small files or just some very big files), as well as mount options (e. g. noexec) which may be requirements for performance or security. But this depends on your specific setting. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...