Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2012 08:54:58 +1000 From: Da Rock <freebsd-questions@herveybayaustralia.com.au> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: One or Four? Message-ID: <4F3EDAC2.9060808@herveybayaustralia.com.au> In-Reply-To: <CAJcQMWfnuyhsA7uEGfSOJxUzsOhH-uUYA%2BXNveH7Ntz-Dt3YMw@mail.gmail.com> References: <4F3ECF23.5000706@fisglobal.com> <CAJcQMWfnuyhsA7uEGfSOJxUzsOhH-uUYA%2BXNveH7Ntz-Dt3YMw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02/18/12 08:40, Maxim Khitrov wrote: > On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 5:05 PM, Robison, Dave > <david.robison@fisglobal.com> wrote: >> Hiya, >> >> A question has arisen with the implementation of bsdinstall in 9.x as >> opposed to sysinstall in 8.x and previous versions of FreeBSD. >> >> It has always been FreeBSD's default to create four partitions and swap as >> such: >> >> / >> /tmp >> /var >> /usr >> swap >> >> The recent changes in 9.x with bsdinstall use a default behavior which >> creates only one partition and swap, with everything living under a single >> "/" partition as such: >> >> / >> swap >> >> We'd like a show of hands to see if folks prefer the "old" style default >> with 4 partitions and swap, or the newer iteration with 1 partition and >> swap. >> >> This is not a discussion of MBR vs GPT. The default moving forward from 9.x >> will be to use GPT. >> >> We realize that one can use bsdinstall to create as many partitions as one >> wants. However, the new default is for one partition and swap. We want to >> know if people would prefer the older style default with four partitions and >> swap when selecting "Guided Partitioning" and "Use Entire Disk". >> >> Let the majority decide which layout is preferred for the default. > / and /usr should be merged together, /var should stay separate, and > /tmp should be tmpfs :) > > At least that's my preferred server configuration starting with 9.0. I > see no benefits in keeping / and /usr separate. A desktop can have > /var on the same file system as well, but servers should always > isolate it. > > Just a few days ago, a misbehaving php script filled-up my entire /var > partition when it got into an endless loop. I've since realized the > value of blocking repeated error log messages in php configuration, > but keeping /var away from the rest was a good safety net. I don't see how a server and desktop should be handled differently, in fact a desktop could be more disastrous than a server so the separate partitions have saved asses many times. /tmp should be tmpfs, yes; but / and /usr should be separate still (c'mon! It's only 1G; why quibble?) because desktop users are not always as 'diligent' as they should be with space, or something else can occur to fill it up. If it is full, then you can't put a fix in /root/, edit fstab, rc.conf, syslog.conf, anything. There are serious consequences to a full file system that can render the system useless. A server may be mission critical, production, whatever; but a desktop user doesn't want too much hassle to restore the system either, especially on a laptop. They certainly don't want to blow the system away and start again for something that silly (dramatic and over the top, I know, but a new user may do just that if they don't know how to fix it quickly without difficulty). The cost of the original layout was small, and the benefit was huge, I've still set all my systems this way (desktop/server). If you are going to change back to the old behaviour don't discriminate. And on that note: I have my hand up and waving wildly :)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F3EDAC2.9060808>