Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 14:48:10 +0930 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: Fernando Schapachnik <fpscha@ns1.sminter.com.ar>, Clem.Dye@wdr.com, Adam Nealis <adamn@csl.com> Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Partition sizes on 3.1 Message-ID: <19990424144810.O97757@freebie.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <199904231248.JAA07787@ns1.sminter.com.ar>; from Fernando Schapachnik on Fri, Apr 23, 1999 at 09:48:52AM -0300 References: <199904231248.JAA07787@ns1.sminter.com.ar> <37207E5E.E9364564@csl.com> <H0000082019dc9ff@MHS> <199904231308.KAA14654@ns1.sminter.com.ar> <H0000082019dc9ff@MHS> <199904231248.JAA07787@ns1.sminter.com.ar>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday, 23 April 1999 at 9:48:52 -0300, Fernando Schapachnik wrote: > Hello: > I'm going to set up a server running 2.2.8 because it will be heavy > loaded and I want it to be as solid as posible. However, I'm planning an > upgrade to 3.2 or 3.3 when -STABLE gets mature enough. > My idea is to partition it like this: > > / > /usr > /usr/local > /var > /home > /tmp > /data > > The goal is to make it easier to upgrade (backup /etc, fresh-install > on / and /usr, then remount remaining partitions). I want to know how > much space (aprox.) do I need for / and /usr on -STABLE. *sigh* here we go again. It's been all of three hours since I last replied on this subject. I think I should work out a standard reply to this question. Without saying how many disks you have, it's impossible to give you any idea. But the simple answer is: / 50 to 70 MB swap 256 MB, spread over as many disks as you have /usr the rest of your system disk Other disks get one file system each. You can choose what to call them. Put /var on another file system where there's space, and make a symlink to it. On Friday, 23 April 1999 at 14:00:50 +0100, Clem.Dye@wdr.com wrote: > I've got to go through this exercise myself soon, when I build my box > - when I get the time - sigh, so I'm interested in how other people > have laid-out their drives. In my case I have 3.2GB to play with. I > plan to allow ~150MB for a swap partition (I have 72MB ram), Use more. FreeBSD is becoming very swap-hungry. > 100MB for / That's probably more than you need, but it can't harm anything. > but beyond that I'm open to ideas. I'm not sure if having /usr/local > on a separate partition actually buys you much (but will stand to be > corrected). It all depends on how much stuff you have in there, and whether you want to put it on a separate disk from /usr--see above. > What about a separate slice for swap - worth doing? No. It doesn't buy you anything. On Friday, 23 April 1999 at 10:08:34 -0300, Fernando Schapachnik wrote: > En un mensaje anterior, Clem.Dye@wdr.com escribió: >> I've got to go through this exercise myself soon, when I build my box >> - when I get the time - sigh, so I'm interested in how other people >> have laid-out their drives. In my case I have 3.2GB to play with. I >> plan to allow ~150MB for a swap partition (I have 72MB ram), 100MB >> for /, but beyond that I'm open to ideas. I'm not sure if having >> /usr/local on a separate partition actually buys you much (but will > > This allows you to reinstall the OS without loosing your applications or > its .conf files. How? I don't see any connection. >> stand to be corrected). What about a separate slice for swap - worth >> doing? > > Yes of course. Why? > Also don't forget to put /home and /tmp on separate partitions, so > 1) fulling /tmp doesn't affect /. In that case, you can use /var/tmp. The only reason for /tmp at all was originally to have some temporary space available in single-user mode. But FWIW, I use an mfs /tmp. > 2) You can mount them noexec to add security and prevent things > like hard links to /etc/passwd and similar. I don't see what this have to do with /tmp and /home file systems. And you can't mount / noexec, because there are a lot of executables on /. And anyway, there's nothing much of interest in /etc/passwd. On Friday, 23 April 1999 at 14:06:22 +0000, Adam Nealis wrote: > Here's the layout of a 2.2.7-STABLE box I have. > > /export[2-6] are users' data (equivalent to your /home I > suppose). What's the advantage of having so many? > I have 512MB swap as I have 128MB RAM. That's probably more than you need, but it's not a problem. How much do you use? > /tmp is big because it's an AMANDA holding disk (as is > /usr2), plus I have > > /usr/obj => /usr2/obj for make world > > NB Until about 10 days ago /usr/ports, /usr/X11R6, /usr/src > and /usr/local were all part of my /usr partition, with > /usr/distfiles => /usr2/distfiles. It was a pain so I think > you're doing the right thing by using lots of partitions. I wonder if you'll say that after you've run out of space and had to patch it with a symlink tree. I can't see any advantage in what you've done. > Although my /usr/ports looks a bit excessive, remember that > when you do a make of the latest XFree86 you can kiss 200MB > goodbye on /usr/ports. All the more reason to leave it in a combined /usr. Looking at those four file systems, you obviously have ample space. When you start to run out, things will look different. Greg -- See complete headers for address, home page and phone numbers finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990424144810.O97757>