[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Single root filesystem evilness decreasing in 2010? (on workstations)



Stan Hoeppner wrote:
All of that talk and gyration over a workstation disk layout?  You never did
mention what the primary application usage is on this machine, which should
be a factor in how you set it up.  If you're an email warrior, what damn
difference does it make, and why bother with LVM on a workstation?  What
size is the new disk?

Well, sorry, I guess. But why not? Like you, I always come up with a little layout for my needs, and I'm here wondering if that's really useful.

*I'd bother with LVM to be able to resize my volumes easily, like I said. Also, I may not be able to use GPT because of dual-boot restrictions, and BIOS MBR's partition table may have limitations that affect me. I don't think that's really the point anyway.

Here's a safe bet, even with grub(2):

swap	4GB		may never need it, but u have plenty of disk
/boot	100MB	ext2	safe call, even if grub(2) doesn't need a /boot
/	40GB	ext2/3	journal may eliminate mandatory check interval
/var	up2u	ext2	sequential write/read, journal unnecessary
/home	up2u	xfs	best performance for all file sizes and counts

For example, why would that be safer to put /boot aside on ext2 with grub2? (Honest question, that was in my first post.)

I know, these layouts depend on so much things, and you can't possibly know what I need if I don't tell you; in fact I wasn't exactly asking for help to partition my volumes (even though I appreciate yours, really), I was trying to figure out how bad it would be if I don't. Yes, "in general", that's a broad subject that affects many things, and that's why I did all this talk and gyration about it. If the discussion isn't of interest, well, let it die.

You raised a point, however - that some trees might need journaling, and some do not. I.. don't follow you. Especially for /var which, beeing written to more often, is more subject to corruption.

BTW, it's possible to use ext4 without a journal (and before anyone points it out, no, it's not the same as ext2).

*You may trust ext4 at this point, but I, and many others don't.  xfs beats
ext4 in every category, so why bother with ext4?

I don't think anybody wants to go there. (That doesn't mean that I disagree with you.)

If you have a 500GB, 750GB, 1TB, 1.5TB, 2TB disk, leave the freak'n bulk of
it unallocated until you actually need it.  This rule alone eliminates much
of the vacillation you are currently experiencing WRT "Omg what am I ever
going to do with all this disk?!"

I'm sorry if sounded that stupid to you, but I will need all of it. What's really a problem is that the disk usage of my local software will vary *greatly* (nearly as much as my data, yes). I either need to use LVM all the time, mount --bind trees on a big filesystem containing all the most variable data and software (which in some way defeats the purpose of partitioning) or.. well, wonder if that is all necessary, and go with the noob "single root filesystem" way - which, as I'm trying to convince myself, may not be that dumb.


Again, if you think this is pointless, leave me with it, I'll be alright.

-thib


Reply to: