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
