Date: Thu, 29 Jan 1998 14:25:53 -0600 From: "Jeffrey J. Mountin" <mountin.man@mixcom.com> To: "Troy Settle" <rewt@i-plus.net>, "(ML) FreeBSD ISP" <isp@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: filesystems Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19980129142553.0070374c@198.137.186.100> In-Reply-To: <020a01bd2cef$09730260$3a4318d0@abyss.b.nu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 02:49 PM 1/29/98 -0500, Troy Settle wrote: >From: Jeffrey J. Mountin <mountin.man@mixcom.com> >This is a 5400 RPM, 8.5ms UW SCSI drive... more on down... Hmmmm... >I'm no longer doing many builds on this machine. I nfs mount from >another box to do a 'make install' for most things (including world) Saving space. >used to be like 250 megs... :) Overkill. >At this point, it handles everything (DNS, http, ftp, radius, sql, squid, >pop3, smtp, nfs server for /home, etc..) Ouch. >I believe the system is scaled to handle ~1000 users, at which time I'll >get a second box to take some of the load off. Eventually, I'll have a >seperate box for damn near every service, though I'm still not sure how >to shear the mail server off from a shell server (what, with NFS file >locking being broke and all). For now, the few shell users we have know >that they risk their mail folders if they use a local mail client. It will bog down before then. With 2 IDE and 1 SCSI things slowed down before 1000 users and www was always separate. YMMV. >Is there a commercial *nix that can be used as an NFS server, but with no >local services? so that mail would be read/writen to from seperate >smtp/pop/shell servers without a problem? Wouldn't IMAP handle mail and shell on separate servers. Considering the traffic on mail, NFS would be a poor choice. And there was a thread recently concerning NFS and performance. >Agreed, that's why I'd say to do combine our experiences... come up with >some generic guidelines that find a middleground of >cost/performance/reliability/etc... More along the lines of determining _when_ to add drives for _what_ services. Cost and performance are determined by the hardware used, the prior going down and the latter improving as time goes by. Reliability varies. >If anyone wants to help move forward on this, I suppose that the current >thread is about the best place to start... > >Being A FreeBSD ISP > >1. Filesystem allocation >1.1 Hardware selection >1.2 slicing My preferance, but I use (A)ll every time... And wish I weren't nagged about it. ;) >1.3 partitioning I'd imagine it would be a better in handbook, but possibly in the FAQ and then more a "allowing room for growth" question. And then the defaults are good for the average user and one would hope that there is someone with experience that can make good determinations of what is needed for growth. Is there a perceived need for this to reduce traffic on the lists. I'm not on questions anymore, so have no clue if such things are commonly asked about and if more than basic suggestions are really needed. With this list, I'd say no with the sendmail thread as an example. After monitoring a system and reading up on security, a good admin should come to realize many of the opinions given are just common sense. Jeff Mountin - Unix Systems TCP/IP networking mountin.man@mixcom.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3.0.3.32.19980129142553.0070374c>