From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Feb 18 00:10:03 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A49AA106566B for ; Sat, 18 Feb 2012 00:10:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Dave.Robison@fisglobal.com) Received: from mx1.fisglobal.com (mx1.fisglobal.com [199.200.24.190]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 644E18FC0C for ; Sat, 18 Feb 2012 00:10:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pps.filterd (ltcfislmsgpa06 [127.0.0.1]) by ltcfislmsgpa06.fnfis.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with SMTP id q1HNQCYj001539 for ; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 18:10:02 -0600 Received: from smtp.fisglobal.com ([10.132.206.15]) by ltcfislmsgpa06.fnfis.com with ESMTP id 131wj90q4a-1 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 18:10:02 -0600 Received: from lefty.vicor.com (10.14.152.55) by smtp.fisglobal.com (10.132.206.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 18:10:02 -0600 Message-ID: <4F3EEC58.1000308@fisglobal.com> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 16:10:00 -0800 From: "Robison, Dave" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20110120 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: References: <4F3ECF23.5000706@fisglobal.com> <20120217234623.cf7e169c.freebsd@edvax.de> <20120217225329.GB30014@gizmo.acns.msu.edu> <021101ccedc9$89445cf0$9bcd16d0$@fisglobal.com> <290E977C-E361-4C7D-8F1E-C1D6D03BAD63@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <290E977C-E361-4C7D-8F1E-C1D6D03BAD63@mac.com> X-Originating-IP: [10.14.152.55] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.6.7361, 1.0.260, 0.0.0000 definitions=2012-02-17_04:2012-02-17, 2012-02-17, 1970-01-01 signatures=0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: One or Four? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: david.robison@fisglobal.com List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2012 00:10:03 -0000 On 02/17/2012 15:55, Chuck Swiger wrote: > > Yes. It works as intended even when /tmp is part of a single root partition; although mounting /tmp as a RAM- or swap-based tmpfs filesystem might be better for many situations. Sure it has its uses, but now you're jumping into new territory where the installer has to either ask the user to create tmpfs or make the decision to do it on its own. As has been stated, this is fine if sufficient RAM is available. Personally I don't like using RAM for tmp. >> Making this world-writable bucket part of "/" seems silly both for Desktops and Servers alike. > You're welcome to your opinion. However, I suspect you're expecting FreeBSD systems to always be partitioned and administered by knowledgeable BSD Unix sysadmins, and those are not always so readily available as one might assume. > I'm not sure why someone has to be knowledgeable to select a particular partitioning scheme. Is it better for a novice to have one big / to fill up as opposed to a separate /var or /tmp? >> b. A nuisance >> >> As "Da Rock" points out, ... recovering your system from a >> file-system-full-event when using "single-/" is just as difficult regardless of >> Desktop versus Server. Having "/tmp" alleviates the difficulty. > It would if /tmp was mounted on a disk partition, and if it also happened to be where space was being consumed. /var/log and /home tend to be more likely locations in my experience, but YMMV. > Actually, in my experience I have huge problems with users misusing /tmp as a holding spot for all manner of files. I like keeping /tmp separate and smallish to discourage its use for everyday transfers. Those things belong in a users home directory, not in /tmp. > > However, for whatever reasons, the overwhelming majority of folks using MacOS X don't have problems using a single root partition, and while they sometimes do fill up their disks, that's a situation which they should be able to recover from without needing expert assistance. I don't recall having unusual issues in running a partition out of space under FreeBSD, either, or difficulty fixing things afterwards-- but such doesn't happen very often if you monitor your systems properly, and have time to respond to "low-space" conditions before they turn into "out of space" conditions. > > Regards, Previously you said that knowledgeable unix admins aren't as common as might be thought... now you're making the assumption that these same novice users will monitor their systems properly for low-space conditions. In a perfect world we all have snmp running properly or some other way to notify us of impending doom. In the real world these things always seem to sneak up and bite us on the behind. However this is all superfluous conversation if the installer gives each user a variety of options. You can select your "one big partition" scheme or go with multiple partitions depending on your preference, and from what I've read so far, this seems to be not only a reasonable idea, but also one which many people would prefer. Dave -- Dave Robison Sales Solution Architect II FIS Banking Solutions 510/621-2089 (w) 530/518-5194 (c) 510/621-2020 (f) daver@vicor.com david.robison@fisglobal.com _____________ The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you.