Re: Ideal partition sizes.
There's a somewhat short mention of cluefull disk partitioning in the
debian-faq, but I found much better discussion of it in the
"Multiple-disks-HOWTO"
> I have two machines. I dislike extended/logical partitions. I like
> performance tuning. My machines have at least two drives in them. All
> that aside, here's the scoop:
[ examples snipped because anyone interested probably kept the message ]
> For the most part, this scheme works exceptionally well. My spare
> partition holds a complete (and completely separate) linux install (single
> partition, just like you had). If I should ever trash my main install, I
> can boot into the spareland and run a tape backup of whatever's left -
> very handy to have around.
This is actually a great idea if you can spare the space. If these
partitioning matters are an item for you, then you probably can. I don't
know if it is with a single 1.2M disk though.
> Both of my swap areas are directly between critical system areas (/ and
> /usr, /tmp and /var), making swap an easy trip from any typical program,
> logfile access, or tempfile. The biggest performance hit comes when
> sendmail is delivering to my mailbox (which is in /local) and is logging
> to /var at the other end of the disk, but some recent sendmail tunings
> have really helped that.
You might have been better off with /home in the place of /. But see the
"Multiple-disks-HOWTO" for a thorough elaboration on that.
I have my /usr/libs on a partition with /lib and made /usr/lib a symlink.
This is a performance issue (well actually more of an experiment :)
Other valuable contemplations on partitioning can be found in the
FileSystem Standard documentation. Anyone wondering if and how he should
partition his disk is IMHO best to read both the FSS and the HOWTO.
Again, if you've only got one disk, there is probably only the argument
of having a complete backup root filesystem that can make it interesting.
Joost
Reply to: