Forwarded at the suggestion of Henrique Pantarotto, as it was clear and
consise (not my choice of words :)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 18:50:14 +0100 (BST)
From: Tim Fletcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Henrique Pantarotto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux with lots of partitions.. ?
> I've been using Linux for almost 2 and a half years now. First I started
> with Slackware, then later went to Red Hat 4.1 and so on...
Private reply as not really relivate to linux-networking
> Many of the manuals that I've read always told me to create lots of Linux
> partitions, like:
>
> swap
> / (root)
> /usr
> /home
> /var
> /boot
>
> However, I never really paid attention to this, and I have always installed
> linux with only 2 partitions: one for swap and a / (root) with all
> available space.
>
> Do I gain better performance by having many partitions?
If you use them on different disks such as:
/ /dev/hda1
/usr /dev/hda2
/usr/local /dev/hdc1
/tmp /dev/hdc2
> The only reason I think for having /home in another partition is if you
> have like other HD or something. I don't think there's a point of a
> home-user with 2 gigs HD install his Linux using 5 or more partitions..
That is useful if you ever have to rebuild the system, also I mount var
with the sync bit set so that will I lose some speed, I am less likely to
lose mail / logs if the machine locks / crashes.
You can hard limit /tmp to 500 meg or such this way (without quotaing)
The chance of a total loss of data is reduced as if / becomes corrupt,
hopefully /usr/local and /home are still alive.
--
Tim Fletcher .~.
/V\ L I N U X
[EMAIL PROTECTED] // \ >Don't fear the penguin<
[EMAIL PROTECTED] /( )\
^^-^^
Who needs a life when there's linux?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
