From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Nov 18 05:25:32 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id FAA20815 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 18 Nov 1997 05:25:32 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers) Received: from gatekeeper.itribe.net (gatekeeper.itribe.net [209.49.144.254]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id FAA20810 for ; Tue, 18 Nov 1997 05:25:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jamie@itribe.net) Message-Id: <199711181325.IAA24163@gatekeeper.itribe.net> Received: forwarded by SMTP 1.5.2. Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 08:23:56 -0500 (EST) From: Jamie Bowden To: chuckr@glue.umd.edu cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Partitioning suggestions? In-Reply-To: <199711180211.VAA18014@earth.mat.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Mon, 17 Nov 1997 chuckr@glue.umd.edu wrote: > Absolutely no sarcasm here, I'm honestly curious why you'd want to have > so many filesystems. I would think that (unless you were a major > invoestor in a drive manufacturer) you'd be exaggerating the chance of > having one be overloaded, and then need to either reformat or swap out > to another, bigger disk, much more often than I. > > A friend who programs a lot shocked me by saying that she regularly > installs just one big partition, for /,/usr/ the whole works. I'd > never done that myself, but I've been trying to come up with some solid > reason why it's a bad idea. For a personal system it's fine. For a server machine, you don't want to worry about filling up /, and having everything die due to lack of disk space. On my machine at home I usually use two partitions (mostly because I have to drives). Jamie Bowden Systems Administrator, iTRiBE.net If we've got to fight over grep, sign me up. But boggle can go. -Ted Faber (on Hasbro's request for removal of /usr/games/boggle)