From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 26 21:40:28 2007 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 3144E16A41A for ; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:40:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aliyaharbouri@gmail.com) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.174]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC33B13C45A for ; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:40:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aliyaharbouri@gmail.com) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id a2so1416764ugf for ; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:40:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=U2oNP4ze325nutHA+FEg0Zr6h3B+nFfuc2Ewqx7SWgE=; b=iI8w1iYVzl0Aaw1vYb9s3YmNwOC+xVOgAJafUn77PJaaqjsDG7B7g0ujpr3r0zx8WA+7YOMvB6k548AVnRJx/bn7JIrIPHuthBhFObXMALpKp/9g5XG6CxLr+djGfG0cxsBiS4xPhGlXOJiwZmcyrRJS2+4bcYsItSdJoDsqMio= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=QSeVjPXMMMEe2N5cR8KRz3lVYiDaZoSK4aPhATe/lRGL3LQzPuaJbrk2B7Oa5kMrgvUCeH5adnOEDcmHbTFIrdR48M0sTVOeRf3JsxXlzQSbafyFMHnwcHvGnd8kjgzYlrvovfYOFBZYGiAP45Y2yxcSLqWx+xUVI6ykAVWGqqI= Received: by 10.66.217.2 with SMTP id p2mr2761152ugg.1190842826339; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:40:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.67.91.14 with HTTP; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:40:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 14:40:26 -0700 From: "Aliya Harbouri" To: "Federico Lorenzi" , Mel In-Reply-To: <3a386af20709261420q6feca0f0kb14290ee527ba7b7@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200709262305.26067.fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net> <3a386af20709261420q6feca0f0kb14290ee527ba7b7@mail.gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Any advice for a Partition Plan for a multi-jailed Server? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:40:28 -0000 Hi guys! Some great ideas & advice. Thanks a lot :-) > > /boot *needs* to be on /. A loader looks for [bootdisk][bootslice] > > [a]/boot/loader. Ok, gotcha. > > Since you have 2 physical drives, you may want to do 8G on each drive. In the > > rare case it's needed, your system is in trouble and being able to swap on > > using 2 drives will be a plus. Sigh. I did not know I COULD split swap. Hum. How does the system use/allocate each across the split ... Ok, ok. That's what Googling's for :-) > > Unless you're a packrat where logs are concerned, I'm not, really. I probably SHOULD be. > you can probably do with: > > /var 10G (on disk 1) > > And use: > > /var/db 100G - this will house MySQL primarily > > /var/spool 10-50G - any queues, most notably mail, disable softupdates. Adjust > > size to match your mail payload. > > /var/mail - "rest" - possibly disable softupdates. Good thoughts. Need to better understand why I care about softupdates one way or the other, though. > > I'm generally a fan of separating trees that can grow out of proportion over > > time, so that you can dump(8) the partition and restore(8) it on a new drive > > without too much worry. Your mileage may vary. Sounds like good advice. > > Also have a look at hier(7) manpage, it's quite informative about the default > > filesystem layout BSD uses. Missed that. :-( Very useful, though! > Um, from what I've understood, it's going to be a jail server, those > defaults would > be all well and good for a normal server, but in this case we want a big > /data. and moderate /jails. > > Here are my recommendations: [] This all sounds good. > This should be just fine, and you can have your disks in RAID 1. > As for performance, RAID 1 doubles read speed. I nvere really thought of RAID 1 as a performance improvement, R or W, but more fault-tolerance. I should read up some more. > PS) I take you know how to use NullFS and the like? I'm currenly at "can". Working on getting to "know";-) Thanks all! Ali