Yes, I did that once on a server that really got heavy traffic.Lolo Uila wrote: What about /tmp? I'm trying to learn about Linux partitioning and besides the /usr and /var partitions I've seen a few articles suggesting /tmp should be on it's own as well (since it gets written to alot).
You can't share those partitions ... they would get into each others way pretty soon. What can be done though is to share e.g. /opt or mount points containing e.g. your web site or other stuff that the package management of each distro won't care about.Lolo Uila wrote: And if you are going to experiment with different distros, how does that affect a system with /usr & /var on sepparate partitions? Do those also get shared between distros (like /home), or would you need a set of those for each distro?
Lolo Uila wrote:What about /tmp? I'm trying to learn about Linux partitioning and besides the /usr and /var partitions I've seen a few articles suggesting /tmp should be on it's own as well (since it gets written to alot).
And if you are going to experiment with different distros, how does that affect a system with /usr & /var on sepparate partitions? Do those also get shared between distros (like /home), or would you need a set of those for each distro?
Thanks. I'm getting ready to deploy Mint on one of my main computers and I'd like to do it "right" so I don't have to redo anything later.
Lolo Uila wrote:Okay, thanks for the info.
I'm still not clear on why it's recommended to put /boot in a separate partition. The rest makes sense, but it seems to me something that small that gets written to infrequently should not have much of a fragmentation risk (and wouldn't be much of a problem if it happened), so why is it bad to just let /boot be part of / ?
Again, thanks for all the help.
PS: and Marcus, it's Da kine...
Lolo Uila wrote:Okay, thanks.
I'm from Kailua originally. I live in Kapolei now. Couldn't afford a house in Kailua. Too expensive! My mortgage in Kapolei in less than I used to pay for rent in Kailua.
# /etc/fstab: static file system information.
# <file system> <mount point> <type> <options> <dump> <pass>
proc /proc proc defaults 0 0
UUID=2a71a794-f8c5-41bb-9b57-5d9370f24f27 / reiserfs noatime,notail 0 1
UUID=8419bbab-b9a1-48b3-8eda-eeccda467e33 /boot ext2 noauto 1 1
UUID=68e72803-e617-4ba1-8762-b2c1080ec301 /home reiserfs noatime,notail 0 2
UUID=29c2b2cd-8261-4485-9d60-6d9e6cac1b40 none swap sw 0 0
/dev/hdc /media/cdrom0 udf,iso9660 user,noauto 0 0
/dev/ /media/floppy0 auto rw,user,noauto 0 0
Lolo Uila wrote:I'm putting Cassandra on a separate 80GB drive in the big tower system. Decided to go with the following partition scheme:
4GB /dev/sda1 ext3 / (primary partition)
6GB /dev/sda5 ext3 /usr (extended partition)
63G /dev/sda6 ext3 /home
3GB /dev/sda7 ext3 /var
2GB /dev/sda8 swap
I'll see how this works out. The tower is dual booting with Win2K and has a LOT more storage available (over 1.5TB currently). Hopefully I can get get most of what I need to do running under Linux, and then I will have to give it some more room.
Any comment, criticisms or suggestions on this partitioning scheme will be appreciated. I haven't installed a lot of stuff yet, so there is still time to change things if there is a compelling need.
If in doubt use Ext3 ... It just works and is a good overall performer for every-day use. Those benchmarks are to be taken "cum grano salis" ... Unless you do some really special stuff (e.g. storage of tons and tons and tons of extremely large files ... for which XFS would be best) you won't even notice any significant speed difference in your every-day usage of your computer.flyhippo wrote: I read that scorp123 recommend XFS or EXT3.
There is no such thing like a "best" filesystem. What is "best" or not highly depends on what you do with your system and how the filesystem can handle that. Generally people say that XFS is best when dealing with tons and tons of really huge files (e.g. 1000 DVD *.iso images, each beyond 4 GB in size ...) ... but if you don't have so many huge files, then XFS isn't necessarily the best choice for you.flyhippo wrote: Or I just need to know that XFS is the best file systems.
VMware Server ... it's available via Canonical's "commercial" repos and can easily be installed via apt-get install vmware-server ... or in GUI via Synaptic.flyhippo wrote: If I want to use windows running as well (since I need to run some windows softwares like filemaker, ms Project, etc) what is the best solution for me. Therefore dual boot is not the option since I have to log out one OS then login to other OS.
/usr appears a little bit too large in my opinion, 10 GB would most likely suffice too and you'd still have plenty of space. /var is a bit large too with 5 GB ... but depending on what you intend to do with this machine (maybe you'll get plenty of log files?) it's maybe not a bad idea to make it this large. As for your /VMs ... you can do it if you do it right. E.g. you could create sub-directories underneath /VMs and then give those sub-directories to each user on your system. Example:msgnomer wrote: HDB 120 GB
hdb1 /boot 150 MB
hdb2 / 5 GB
hdb3 extended partition to end
hdb5 /usr 20 GB
hdb6 /var 5 GB
hdb7 /tmp 2 GB
hdb8 /VMs (rest of disk) <- virtual box machine space (not sure I can actually do this. They may have to go in /home?)
sudo mkdir /VMs/user1
sudo mkdir /VMs/user2
sudo chown -R user1:user1sgroup /VMs/user1
sudo chown -R user2:user2sgroup /VMs/user2
ln -s /VMs/user1 ./my-virtual-machines
OK then. Otherwise I'd suggest to swap the Master/Slave setup but changing the boot order should work too.msgnomer wrote: BIOS is already set to boot hdb first.
msgnomer wrote:It's just a desktop system with one user.
msgnomer wrote:hda2 /swap 3 GB (1.75 GB RAM)
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 7 guests