Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 10:35:31 -0400 From: John Duncan <jddst19+@pitt.edu> To: yves@CC.McGill.CA Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: An idea, it is possibly good Message-ID: <33772AB3.B2D5FB00@pitt.edu> References: <199705121248.IAA05517@maelstrom.cc.mcgill.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Yves Lepage wrote:
> here's an idea to enhance file systems's usefulness: virtual partitioning.
>
> Let's say I have a FreeBSD system on one big partition. Virtual partititioning would
> allow me for example to 'reserve' space for specified directories (at mount time let's say).
> Ideally, the reservations could be made/altered on a mounted file system, possibly
> using a remount with options.
Hmm. Yes, but I'm recalling a couple of lines from my high school
code of conduct:
13) Parents are asked to encourage their children to stay in school
and to help them not break the school code.
14) Parents are also to encourage their children to partition their
disks in such a way that the minimum speed/space tradeoff
is attained, with regards to what will be stored on the disks.
---
I'd say that "virtual partitioning" is a good idea in as much as
it is speedy to resize and rehash, _but_, I'm not sure if it's
release-style material. Anyone with a backup tape can repartition a
disk to find a better spacetime relationship in a matter of hours,
and such drastic action probably only needs to be taken when the
circumstances are dire. So, for "freebsd the server", it seems
unnecessary when the entire disk can fit on one or two tapes, or in
the autoloader.
Such a package may be useful for the guy who is using "freebsd
the workstation", and he parts his disk such that he has a 300-meg
root, 50-meg var, and 2k user... Yeah, I think that this would
be good functionality.
It might be a good idea to stray the source tree into a genuine
server and workstation install, with the server version containing
more of the stuff in source and with many more customizable options,
self-compiling to handle certain variances when installed, and the
workstation arriving in an easily installable binary format,
with a separate cd of the source snapshot. Workstation users
probably shouldn't have to recompile a kernel in order to remove
some of the server-esque options. Probably many workstation-type
things could be placed at the user level, or at least in lkms. Servers,
on the other hand, may or may not need certain functionality, like
kernel ppp. It's annoying for servers to have to install a binary then
hack the config files for what they actually want, when it could have
been done once-and-for-all when the beast was created.
But I won't self-serve too much, unless anyone cares what I have
to say.
-John
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?33772AB3.B2D5FB00>