Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 16:42:46 -0600 From: Douglas Carmichael <dcarmich@dcarmichael.net> To: Devin Teske <devin.teske@fisglobal.com> Cc: "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>, "<david.robison@fisglobal.com>" <david.robison@fisglobal.com> Subject: Re: One or Four? Message-ID: <41FD7AE2-6DCB-4326-BADC-0D165B4524C6@dcarmichael.net> In-Reply-To: <020601ccedc4$681c4d80$3854e880$@fisglobal.com> References: <4F3ECF23.5000706@fisglobal.com> <ECC9F8CC-7535-4C82-9F88-358DA3B42D5C@mac.com> <020601ccedc4$681c4d80$3854e880$@fisglobal.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I would prefer having the option of four partitions for fault tolerance reas= ons if needed. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 17, 2012, at 4:35 PM, Devin Teske <devin.teske@fisglobal.com> wrote: >=20 >=20 >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd- >> questions@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Chuck Swiger >> Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 2:18 PM >> To: david.robison@fisglobal.com >> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >> Subject: Re: One or Four? >>=20 >> On Feb 17, 2012, at 2:05 PM, Robison, Dave wrote: >>> We'd like a show of hands to see if folks prefer the "old" style default= > with 4 >> partitions and swap, or the newer iteration with 1 partition and swap. >>=20 >> For a user/desktop machine, I prefer one root partition. For other roles= like > a >> server, I prefer multiple partitions which have been sized for the intend= ed > usage. >>=20 >=20 > Then does the question ultimately become... >=20 > "Shall we then have two algorithms and ask the user whether they are insta= lling > for the desktop versus server?" >=20 > If that's the case, then I think this is something I could personally live= with > (as it then becomes possible to obtain the old layout of 4 partitions with= > auto-calculated sizes ala Colin Percival's last sizing algorithm committed= in > version 1.149 of src/usr.sbin/sysinstall/label.c made pre-SVN 6 years 6 mo= nths > ago). >=20 > See > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/usr.sbin/sysinstall/Attic/label.= c?rev=3D > 1.149;content-type=3Dtext%2Fx-cvsweb-markup >=20 > The above link describes the partition scheme that I and colleagues seek-m= ost to > return to FreeBSD 9.x and higher. >=20 > I argue that Colin's algorithm is still useful for servers and is still th= e > preferred method of allocation for servers and thus should remain an optio= n, > even if we don't change the [new] default back to the above linked-to sche= me. > --=20 > Devin >=20 >=20 > _____________ > The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidenti= al. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message an= d all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any man= ner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware t= hat any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review b= y persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.or= g" >=20
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?41FD7AE2-6DCB-4326-BADC-0D165B4524C6>