Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 00:59:36 +0100 From: Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be> To: "Mike Meyer" <mwm-dated-1012433187.acca14@mired.org>, Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be> Cc: chip <chip@wiegand.org>, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Bad disk partitioning policies (was: "Re: FreeBSD Intaller (was "Re: ... RedHat ...")") Message-ID: <p05101202b8779d64e79d@[10.0.1.14]> In-Reply-To: <15441.59810.814354.950502@guru.mired.org> References: <20020123114658.A514@lpt.ens.fr> <20020123124025.A60889@HAL9000.wox.org> <3C4F5BEE.294FDCF5@mindspring.com> <20020123223104.SM01952@there> <p0510122eb875d9456cf4@[10.0.1.3]> <15440.35155.637495.417404@guru.mired.org> <p0510123fb876493753e0@[10.0.1.3]> <15440.53202.747536.126815@guru.mired.org> <p05101242b876db6cd5d7@[10.0.1.3]> <15441.17382.77737.291074@guru.mired.org> <p05101245b8771d04e19b@[10.0.1.3]> <15441.59810.814354.950502@guru.mired.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 5:26 PM -0600 2002/01/25, Mike Meyer wrote: > I agree about that - if you're going to be logging lots of data, you > probably want to segregate that from everything else. For a mail > server - as opposed to a mail gateway - you probably want the mail > queue segregated. I submit that for any machine whose primary job involves handling mail, you want at least /var/spool/mqueue on a separate filesystem, and if it also serves mailboxes to users (either local or remote via protocols like POP3 and/or IMAP), then you almost certainly want /var/spool/mail (or wherever the message store is located) on a separate filesystem. In these same types of situations, I believe that high levels of logging are required in order to meet the accountability requirements that were originally written into RFC 1123, and in these situations I believe that you will want a separate filesystem for /var/log. > That's the real point - you need to think about what the system will > be used for. Blindly partitioning the disk into umpteen file systems > is no better than blindly putting everything in one big file system. I'll agree that you should think about what the system will be doing and configure the machine accordingly, but in my experience, there are certain additional file systems that I have found that have always been useful to create. > Did you look into any of the alternative solutions? In particular, Dan > Berenstein - the author of qmail - has one designed to solve that > problem. I haven't checked on it, but that 75% figure make me think I > ought to. There are now a number of different replacements for syslog, some of which use or allow you to use TCP instead of UDP. At the time we had this particular problem, there were no replacements that we knew of for syslog (and we looked for them). We even took the original syslog code (from Eric) and seriously looked at hacking it ourselves to add support for TCP, although we didn't end up going this way. These days, I would look at syslog-ng, or maybe ssyslog. However, I would also consider simply logging things locally and then rotate the logs periodically and moving the files separately. Regardless of whether it uses TCP or UDP, syslog can still cause a heavy load on a system, especially if it is used across a network. Oh, and I wouldn't touch anything from Dan with an infinitely long pole. -- Brad Knowles, <brad.knowles@skynet.be> H4sICIFgXzsCA2RtYS1zaWcAPVHLbsMwDDvXX0H0kkvbfxiwVw8FCmzAzqqj1F4dy7CdBfn7 Kc6wmyGRFEnvvxiWQoCvqI7RSWTcfGXQNqCUAnfIU+AT8OZ/GCNjRVlH0bKpguJkxiITZqes MxwpSucyDJzXxQEUe/ihgXqJXUXwD9ajB6NHonLmNrUSK9nacHQnH097szO74xFXqtlbT3il wMsBz5cnfCR5cEmci0Rj9u/jqBbPeES1I4PeFBXPUIT1XDSOuutFXylzrQvGyboWstCoQZyP dxX4dLx0eauFe1x9puhoi0Ao1omEJo+BZ6XLVNaVpWiKekxN0VK2VMpmAy+Bk7ZV4SO+p1L/ uErNRS/qH2iFU+iNOtbcmVt9N16lfF7tLv9FXNj8AiyNcOi1AQAA To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p05101202b8779d64e79d>