Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 08:09:42 -0600 From: Jimmie Houchin <jhouchin@texoma.net> To: Adriaan de Groot <adridg@cs.kun.nl> Cc: amd64 freebsd <freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Partitions Message-ID: <3FD87AA6.7030106@texoma.net> In-Reply-To: <200312111330.08052.adridg@cs.kun.nl> References: <3FD7F786.7010208@texoma.net> <200312111330.08052.adridg@cs.kun.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Adriaan de Groot wrote: > On Thursday 11 December 2003 05:50, Jimmie Houchin wrote: > >>Do I really need a 4gb swap partition/slice? >>I have 4gb ram. > > 8 is suggested, no? Conventionally yes. But strangely enough the label program only did 4096mb in its original suggestion. So I wasn't sure if it had different understanding with large amounts of ram. > Certainly if you've got a 220G drive, you can afford that? If I need to, yes. But I just didn't like the thought of idle space which could be used. When I "naively" hoped swap would be used sparingly. > The story is sort of this: the VM is optimized for the situation that there's > twice as much swap as memory. If you never hit swap (I don't, and I've only > got 1G RAM, but then again I only do 12-way parallel compiles of C++ code and > no physics simulations or model checking) that's not so bad, but if you _do_ > end up using lots of swap, this may slow you down. Also, I believe that in > case of kernel panics, you can get a complete dump in swap if you want, which > would mean that you need at least as much as you have memory. > > So much for the i-think-so and old wives' tales stuff. Well it looks like I should ere (if it be such) on the side of safety and precaution. 8gb it is. > (original suggestion) > >>/ 256mb >>/swap 4gb >>/var 256mb >>/tmp 256mb >>/usr 228gb (the rest) > > > Tastes vary. First off, /var contains logs that can get pretty big if you're a > serveer. For workstation use, this is much less important. If you don't have > a seperate /home, it goes in /usr/home. A large /tmp is useful for big > compile jobs. Put it on another partition if you're a server. Locally, > filling up / isn't as bad. For just /usr, 3G is usually enough _if_ you clean > up ports regularly, (or set WRKDIRPREFIX), and have a nice big /usr/local for > all the addons. I prefer that setup, since it means I can backup and restore > system stuff in /usr separately from addons and ports stuff in /usr/local. > > My personal setup is > > /dev/ad4s1a 989M 451M 459M 50% / > devfs 1.0K 1.0K 0B 100% /dev > /dev/ad4s1d 989M 33M 877M 4% /var > /dev/ad4s1e 19G 2.7G 15G 15% /usr > /dev/ad4s1f 5.8G 1.0G 4.3G 19% /home-local > /dev/ad4s1g 24G 8.4G 14G 38% /usr/local > > (see, no separate /tmp and I haven't cleaned it in a while) (/home-local is > for when the NFS server is down) (note the usage in /usr) (/usr/local > contains builds of Qt 3.[012] and KDE 3.[012]). > > Again, it's a matter of taste and you projected usage. Thanks for the information. I'll chew on it awhile. I have been planning on symlinking /var and /tmp to my /home dir. I'll do a fresh install this afternoon with an updated partion scheme. Thanks. Jimmie Houchin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3FD87AA6.7030106>