From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Tue Jun 25 14:27:42 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC03915CDCA1 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 14:27:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu) Received: from kicp.uchicago.edu (kicp.uchicago.edu [128.135.20.70]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 160058D2F5 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 14:27:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu) Received: from point.uchicago.edu (point.uchicago.edu [128.135.52.6]) by kicp.uchicago.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72AEF71804B for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 09:27:40 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: Can I recreate my .snap directories ? To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <2214.1561413756@segfault.tristatelogic.com> <5d11700c.1c69fb81.56ede.4e36SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com> <20190625071232.b01cecfc.freebsd@edvax.de> From: Valeri Galtsev Message-ID: <62afde1a-193d-600d-086b-7dfdea0e0b7e@kicp.uchicago.edu> Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 09:27:40 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190625071232.b01cecfc.freebsd@edvax.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 160058D2F5 X-Spamd-Bar: + Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dmarc=fail reason="" header.from=uchicago.edu (policy=none) X-Spamd-Result: default: False [1.73 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.21)[-0.211,0]; DMARC_POLICY_SOFTFAIL(0.10)[uchicago.edu : No valid SPF, No valid DKIM,none]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.65)[0.647,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[cached: kicp.uchicago.edu]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.21)[0.211,0]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[70.20.135.128.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.10.0]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:160, ipnet:128.135.0.0/16, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(-0.01)[country: US(-0.06)]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 14:27:42 -0000 On 2019-06-25 00:12, Polytropon wrote: > On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 19:34:48 -0700, Michael Sierchio wrote: >> There will be one per filesystem, provided those filesystems support >> snapshots. >> >> If you see only /.snap, you have one big filesystem. That's okay for toy >> systems, or laptops, but you really want separate filesystems for /var, >> /tmp (which may be a tmpfs), and /usr. > > Is this still the case? Yes for me. And in addition to /usr I do prefer to have /usr/local. Also I have /home, and some place where _users_ web files live mounted as separate filesystems (with nosuid/sgid and nofollowsymlinks for web directories). Even though the host is actually a bunch of jails, not even a single jail... Just me, humble sysadmin. Valeri > > Don't get me wrong - I've always been a fan of functional partitioning, > especially to stop misbehaving processes to mess up the whole system > ("disk full, can't even write error log") as well as using features > such as noexec on "untrusted user filesystems". With ZFS of course, > this is all a lot easier, but with UFS, do people still use functional > partitioning instead of "putting everything into one big / because > that's how you do it today"? > > -- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++