Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2009 21:53:33 +0000 From: Frank Shute <frank@shute.org.uk> To: Jerry McAllister <jerrymc@msu.edu> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, Kaya Saman <SamanKaya@netscape.net> Subject: Re: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question Message-ID: <20091229215333.GA39411@orange.esperance-linux.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20091229172548.GA9656@gizmo.acns.msu.edu> References: <4B3927EB.4030802@optiplex-networks.com> <6201873e0912281420n590b173dtac94f9936cca6e3@mail.gmail.com> <4B393463.5060504@netscape.net> <6201873e0912281504j552d6351mf64d8e566d54bcef@mail.gmail.com> <20091229142310.GD90870@Alex1.lan> <4B3A1E1A.1040506@netscape.net> <20091229162711.GA38738@orange.esperance-linux.co.uk> <20091229172548.GA9656@gizmo.acns.msu.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 12:25:48PM -0500, Jerry McAllister wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 04:27:11PM +0000, Frank Shute wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 05:19:54PM +0200, Kaya Saman wrote: > > > > > > Many thanks guys for all the advice!!!! :-) > > > It is really appreciated! > > > ... > > > > > > I reckon the proposed disk usage spec from the FreeBSD hand book should > > > suffice though shouldn't it?? > > > > IMO the root slice is too small in the handbook. You should make it > > 2GB, since you've got the space. > > First of all, you are mixing up your terminology. > You do not mean 'slice' here. > The unit used for root or any other filesystem in > a non-"dangerously-dedicated" disk is called a partition. > Partitions divisions of slices and are identified > as a..h with c reserved for the system and by > convention (and expectation of some pieces of software) 'a' > is for the bootable OS partition (root) and 'b' is used for swap. You're correct. I thought they used a separate slice for the root partition. They don't. I usually do. > > In FreeBSD, partitions reside inside of slices. A slice is > essentially the same thing as a DOS primary partition and is the > initial (primary) division of a disk. A disk drive may have up > to four slices identified as 1..4 and each may be made bootable > or not and contain different OSen or OS versions. If a disk is > only to be used for a single installation of FreeBSD, it is most > common to define just one slice which encompasses the whole drive, > leaving the other three slices empty and unused. (It is also > common to define a 'dangerously dedicated' disk, but that is > a different discussion issue than that being addressed here) > > In FreeBSD, slices are defined and created by the FreeBSD fdisk > program, though a number of other partition management utilities > can be used and FreeBSD seems to be moving to a new one too. > > In FreeBSD, one uses bsdlabel(8) to create partitions within a > slice. Each slice can have up to 8 identified as a..h, but the 'c' > partition is reserved and must be left unused. > > We use common names associated with partitions, such as / (root) > /usr, /var, /home, etc. Those are essentially directories that > are 'linked' to a partition by the mount system. You create > a mount point using the mkdir(1) command and then link using mount(8). > > The 'a' partition becomes root because it gets mounted to the / mount point. > > Now, on to divvying up the disk. > I agree that the root partition listed in the handbook is anciently > too small. But, I don't see what you need 2GB for unless you put > everything (/usr, /var, etc) in it. Since you are defining those > separately, root really only needs about a half GigaByte. I am > running a little low on one machine with 1/3 GB in root, but still going. > I also create a partition for /tmp to keep it isolated from the > other filesystems, in case something runs wild. I'm struggling with a 1GB / here: /dev/ad0s2a 984524 657068 248696 73% / That's having removed /boot/kernel.old/ after running out of space during upgrading to 8.0 I can't see anything else I can delete. /home and /var are not on that slice. So I think it depends on how you upgrade your machine. E.g less room needed if you use freebsd-update (?) > > > > > > > With a larger HD I would normally do something like 15 - 25GB / (root) > > > partition and the rest for /home with round 1.5 - 3GB for swap. > > > > > > Now my HD is round 40GB so I will do a minimal install and try to > > > maximize the /home slice! As result only services I will run are DNS, > > > NTP, SAMBA and NFS. > > > > What is not unusual is to symlink /home e.g: > > > > # ln -s /usr/home /home > > > > ditto for /tmp. i.e you remove all the stuff that uses up space from > > the root partition. > > > > So the only slices you need are /, /usr, /var and swap. > > > > How I'd slice up the disk: > > > > 2GB for / > > 2GB for swap > > 2GB for /var > > 34GB for /usr > > > > > > > I suppose I could get away with something like 2GB for / which would > > > then contain /tmp, /etc, /root, /boot etc..... > > My suggestion is more like: > > partition mount point Size > a / 512 MegaBytes (1/2 GByte) > b swap 2048 MBytes (2 GBytes) > d /tmp 512 MBytes > e /usr 4096 MBytes > f /var 4096 MBytes > g /home 29 GB (eg all of the rest of the disk) > > If you are running a database, you will want /var to be larger or > to move things in to that /home file system. > > I actually use a different mount point name than /home because /home > is assumed for other things in some howto-s hanging around. > > I also move and symlink > /usr/local > /usr/ports > /usr/src > and sometimes /var/spool > in to that '/home' filesystem and then make the actual /usr and /var > only half the above sizes and increase the space in '/home' (33 GB) so > they can grow there more easily. > > Things in a well running system do not grow so much in /tmp and > if something does go wild and spew out a lot of stuff, you really > want to notice it before it gobbles up 30GB of space, so you > need enough /tmp to run easily, but do not want huge amounts. > Thus, putting /tmp in its own limited partition is a bit of a protection. > > All users' login (home) directories and web content go in that '/home' > filesystem too, where they can grow without having to redo disk later. > > In spite of the name that seems to suggest it, I never put users' home > directories in /usr. It may have begun that way back in the earliest > of days, but /usr has become part of the OS rather than the place for > users to work so I don't want users's monkey business to foul up /usr. > Nothing wrong with your scheme, Jerry. Any slicing/partitioning scheme has it's pros and cons though and it all depends on usage but I'd still make / larger. What's a couple of gigs worth nowadays even on a relatively small disk? > ////jerry Regards, > > > > > Should be OK but /tmp symlinked to /usr/tmp as some things can really > > fill up /tmp. For example, IIRC OpenOffice needs gigs of temp space > > to build. > > > > > > > > Only 2 machines will be connected, my uncles Win XP box and my > > > Linux/Solaris system. > > > > Should work fine. Just remember to make your /home and /tmp symlinks > > as soon as you first boot up. > > > > Regards, > > > > -- > > > > Frank > > -- Frank Contact info: http://www.shute.org.uk/misc/contact.html
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20091229215333.GA39411>