Date: Sun, 07 Aug 2005 16:25:02 +0300 From: Niki Denev <nike_d@cytexbg.com> To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: /usr/portsnap vs. /var/db/portsnap Message-ID: <42F60BAE.9070502@cytexbg.com> In-Reply-To: <42F4F979.7080705@gamersimpact.com> References: <42F47C0D.2020704@freebsd.org> <20050806112118.GA7708@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> <20050806143812.GA76296@over-yonder.net> <42F4F446.90304@freebsd.org> <42F4F979.7080705@gamersimpact.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ryan Sommers wrote: > I would agree, even without portsnap. With things like MySQL using > /var/db (if I remember) as the default it might be a way to avoid a few > more mails to questions@ without impacting the normal user. And let's not forget the default qmail queue location "/var/qmail/queue" :) > Hard drives are pennies to the GB and always getting cheaper; I've been > making 1-5gb /var's for awhile even on non-database servers just to have > a little more wiggle room for logs. > > As a side note, I've always wished we had a selectable list of "auto" > configure options, database server, web-server, minimalist, etc. >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42F60BAE.9070502>