From owner-freebsd-questions Thu Mar 30 12:30:51 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from kestrel.prod.itd.earthlink.net (kestrel.prod.itd.earthlink.net [207.217.121.155]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD30237BAA9 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2000 12:30:48 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bduk@earthlink.net) Received: from earthlink.net (sdn-ar-004orportP334.dialsprint.net [63.178.68.240]) by kestrel.prod.itd.earthlink.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA20125; Thu, 30 Mar 2000 12:30:15 -0800 (PST) Received: (from bduk@localhost) by earthlink.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA00350; Thu, 30 Mar 2000 11:20:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bduk) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 11:20:42 -0800 (PST) Posted-Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 11:20:42 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200003301920.LAA00350@earthlink.net> From: Derrick Baumer To: conrads@home.com Cc: scotte@speakeasy.org, questions@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: (message from Conrad Sabatier on Thu, 30 Mar 2000 12:33:31 -0600 (CST)) Subject: Re: Help with partitioning schemes Reply-To: bduk@earthlink.net Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Of course, there is never *one* correct answer. > On 30-Mar-00 Scott wrote: > The last time I tried to install FreeBSD the installer offered its > own default partition mapping. Not knowing the proper sizes, I > chose the defaults. What recomended partition mappings do people > recommend for a system which will be FreeBSD-only (6 Gig drive) > and why do you choose your scheme? I have a 64M root partition that was at one time about 70% full, but then I removed a number of old kernels that I hadn't used in some time. (Once the system is "good", you don't usually need ten extra "just in case" kernels). Now it's about 56% full. /var is 402M, but there's a specific reason for that. Running a custom install of the postgreSQL database server, it's data files are stored in /var. I also have my Apache set to use /var/html as it's document root. The idea was to *try* to get /usr mountable read-only and still be able to modify the dynamic content of the system. If you're going to use a large database that uses /var, make /var at least as large as the data sets you intend to use. I happened to have a 402M hard drive handy and just committed the whole thing for it. It's currently about 43% full, but growing slowly. With 64M RAM, I have 128M swap, using the old twice-your-memory rule. I don't think I'd go larger than that because a) The things I do don't use up that much memory, and b) If I was using all 64M RAM *and* 128M swap, more swap wouldn't help because the system would be on its knees swapping like mad anyway. /home, if you make it separate (makes re-installs easier), really depends on what your users use. I have 402M for home, only because I had two of those hard drives I mentioned earlier. Of course, /usr is usually "everything else", and the only time it wouldn't be is if you had a highly specific plan for your system with storage requirements pretty well spelled out. Some people advocate for /usr being a read-only system, in which case it would only have to be a little larger than what is required for a basic install, /usr/local being used for add-ons. Them's my thoughts. Sorry for rambling. -- Derrick Baumer - Black Duck Software To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message