Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 22:34:02 -0700 From: Graeme Tait <graeme@echidna.com> To: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> Cc: FreeBSD Questions <questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Disk Partitioning (was Clearing /var/mail) Message-ID: <3625894A.71D9@echidna.com> References: <75B246B6570BD211815E0060B05785010355DF@naeugnt1.netassociates.com> <75B246B6570BD211815E0060B057850148EF@naeugnt1.netassociates.com> <19981014113501.C21983@freebie.lemis.com> <3624A3A4.1E79@echidna.com> <19981015104330.E586@freebie.lemis.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Greg Lehey wrote: > > On Wednesday, 14 October 1998 at 6:14:12 -0700, Graeme Tait wrote: > > Greg Lehey wrote: <snipped extensively> > They all look allocated to me, they just have little in common with > the original idea. But I disagree strongly with the approach. Are not cylinders 389-553 of da0 unallocated to any filesystem? > > As installed, it became: > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > # Device Mountpoint FStype Options Dump Pass# > > /dev/da0s1b none swap sw 0 0 > > /dev/da1s1b none swap sw 0 0 > > /dev/da0s1a / ufs rw 1 1 > > /dev/da0s1h /tmp ufs rw 2 2 > > /dev/da0s1e /usr ufs rw 2 2 > > /dev/da1s1e /usr/obj ufs rw,noauto,async,noatime 2 2 > > /dev/da0s1g /usr/ports ufs rw,noauto,async,noatime 2 2 > > /dev/da0s1f /usr/src ufs rw,noauto,async,noatime 2 2 > > /dev/da0s1d /var ufs rw 2 2 > > /dev/cd0c /cdrom cd9660 ro,noauto 2 2 > > proc /proc procfs rw 0 0 > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ... > > 8 partitions: > > # size offset fstype [fsize bsize bps/cpg] > > a: 409600 0 4.2BSD 0 0 0 # (Cyl. 0 - 25*) > > b: 524288 409600 swap # (Cyl. 25*- 58*) > > c: 8888924 0 unused 0 0 # (Cyl. 0 - 553*) > > d: 409600 5849088 4.2BSD 0 0 0 # (Cyl. 364*- 389*) > > e: 3072000 933888 4.2BSD 0 0 0 # (Cyl. 58*- 249*) > > f: 512000 4005888 4.2BSD 0 0 0 # (Cyl. 249*- 281*) > > g: 716800 4517888 4.2BSD 0 0 0 # (Cyl. 281*- 325*) > > h: 614400 5234688 4.2BSD 0 0 0 # (Cyl. 325*- 364*) > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > The only valid reasons for more than one partition on a drive are: > > 1. Security. If you screw up a file system, you usually don't screw > up the others. This happens very seldom nowadays, however. But would you not still have at least partitions for swap, / and /usr ? I guess my question now is what *is* the "best" way to partition these two drives (let's say for a general-purpose web server setup, supporting also mail, ftp, DNS, web-related databases, with a rather large [2-3GB] set of html files, and busy web activity logs). > If you really do need extensibility, take a look at Vinum > (http://www.lemis.com/vinum.html). Well, I have looked at it, but I guess I was rather put off by the red stuff at the top, and beta state. Plus it wasn't clear to me, with my minimal UNIX knowledge, how I would use it, and what I would gain. Is the software RAID-5 going to be free, and how does its performance compare with hardware? > > Graeme Tait - Echidna > > That's an interesting name from time zone -7. Ex-aussie! Platypus was taken, of course, so now everyone (non-aussie) says "What's echidna?" ("ch" as in "chin"). -- Graeme Tait - Echidna, a.k.a. Tachyglossus Aculeatus To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3625894A.71D9>