Spider wrote:
begin quote On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 15:18:32 +0000 MAL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm really just asking if anyone has any recommendations for partition layout, what filesystems on what partitions, and what general structure would be fastest?
I'm a nut, I've had severe problems with harddrives the last year (several broken ones.. ) so my suggestion is as follows: ' /boot. one on each drive, duplicate manually and make sure the system can boot off either. Install bootloader on both. Just in case one drive dies.
I have the RAID/LVM, including root, setup on a server I run, so I'm aware of this.. but is it really worth in on a RAID-0 setup? If one disk dies, I've lost the lot, and there's always boot from CD :)
/home : backup and keep as small as possible, performance degrading tasks shouldn't be accessing /home overly much anyhow. (bad tasks ;)
Ok, LVM/EVMS says I don't have to worry about sizes too much :)
Speaking of which, Ext2/3 and ReiserFS have filesystem resize tools, what about XFS & JFS?
/ : around 3-4 gb partition. perhaps more
Does XFS support extended attributes? I am attracted more to Ext3 for this fact, and for ease of compiling kernels, (I use Win4Lin).
/var : 'about 1 Gb, I usually have this as ext3 with data journal mode. its not performance limiting my system, and I dang well want my logs when things break.
/usr/portage : on its own partition, around 5 gb. use ext2 here. best erformance, and its no valuable data, nothing thats even difficult to recover.
Or Ext3 in writeback mode?
if you want to use ccache, up this with another one or two gb for the cache-dir, and move that here.
move temp-build to /usr/portage/TEMP or other, just to keep it on your raided fast drive.
Other data (aka /mnt/store ;) , recent tests suggest that JFS and XFS
both perform very good and with very low CPU overhead. Reiserfs has bad
case of CPU slaughter.
http://fsbench.netnation.com/
So all the above partitions on the RAID disks?
//Spider
Thanks, MAL
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
