Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 07:12:32 +0200 From: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> To: Michael Sierchio <kudzu@tenebras.com> Cc: Thomas Mueller <mueller6722@twc.com>, FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Can I recreate my .snap directories ? Message-ID: <20190625071232.b01cecfc.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <CAHu1Y73uGs4TZ0Kcio00f0nmLxtCEQkfeUwX_o9jr3bwO7haYw@mail.gmail.com> References: <2214.1561413756@segfault.tristatelogic.com> <CAHu1Y702UxMiFURL56-CrLUz%2B4SEPLirsYZXBz1B8=_x6rWUKw@mail.gmail.com> <5d11700c.1c69fb81.56ede.4e36SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com> <CAHu1Y73uGs4TZ0Kcio00f0nmLxtCEQkfeUwX_o9jr3bwO7haYw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 19:34:48 -0700, Michael Sierchio wrote:
> There will be one per filesystem, provided those filesystems support
> snapshots.
>
> If you see only /.snap, you have one big filesystem. That's okay for toy
> systems, or laptops, but you really want separate filesystems for /var,
> /tmp (which may be a tmpfs), and /usr.
Is this still the case?
Don't get me wrong - I've always been a fan of functional partitioning,
especially to stop misbehaving processes to mess up the whole system
("disk full, can't even write error log") as well as using features
such as noexec on "untrusted user filesystems". With ZFS of course,
this is all a lot easier, but with UFS, do people still use functional
partitioning instead of "putting everything into one big / because
that's how you do it today"?
--
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20190625071232.b01cecfc.freebsd>