On Friday 22 June 2001 16:39, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
> Friday, June 22, 2001, 9:17:12 AM, you wrote:
>
> RC> On Friday 15 June 2001 16:13, Kevin J. Menard, Jr. wrote:
> >> This system would be used mostly for web-hosting, so I was
> >> figuring a large /home partition. Likewise only one or two kernels
> >> max, so I figured a small /boot. And finally, and this is really
> >> where I'm
>
> RC> Why do you need a separate partition for /boot? Why not just have
> it in RC> the root fs?
>
> Dunno. Figured for disk failure or something.
What exactly will that save you from? If the root FS gets messed up then
having a separate /boot won't gain you much...
> >> looking for help, it will be used as an IMAP/SMTP machine. So,
> >> should I create a separate /var partition? I'm hesitant because I
> >> don't want to a) not create a large enough partition, or b) create
> >> too large of
>
> RC> I suggest having your email stored on the same file system as
> /home. RC> Then you have all of your customer data on the same file
> system for easy RC> backup. Also it saves juggling space.
>
> Would a symlink from /var to /home/var be sufficient?
I suggest creating /home/mail and linking /var/spool/mail to it. However
if you want decent performance for email you want to use Maildir. By
default maildir storage goes into user's home directories which solves
this issue.
> >> one and waste space. Do the performance gains outweigh this? (I'm
> >> not terribly worried about the redundancy with the RAID 10 and all).
>
> RC> What performance gains are you referring to?
>
> Any that might occur from having separate partitions.
If you have two partitions on the same physical media (in this case a
RAID-10) then expect to lose performance. If you make it all one large
partition then the file system drivers can optimise things more.
> So, if you recommend /boot be with / and /var with /home, why not just
> have / and everything in there? Is this reliable enough? Today's hard
I recommend having a separate /home to limit the things that can go
wrong. I recommend leaving /var on the root file system unless you need
a lot of space in /var. Also consider a separate file system for
/var/tmp and make /tmp a sym-linke to /var/tmp/tmp .
> drives have come a long way, and with a RAID 10, would I be safe in
> doing this? Or should I just have a coulple gig / and the rest for
> /home?
RAID has no relevance to the issue of partitioning in this sense.
--
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
