Best Filesystems?

[Colin McGregor]

--- William Park <opengeometry-FFYn/CNdgSA at public.gmane.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 07:02:07PM -0400, CLIFFORD
> ILKAY wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On August 10, 2005 11:12, Steve wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I have a question about filesystem types. I've
> got an 80GB drive
> > > that I'm planning to reformat and install
> Ubuntu. I plan to create
> > > 3 partitions:
> > >
> > > 9.0 GB - For the OS and system files.
> > > 512 MB - SWAP (equal to amount of RAM)
> > > 70 GB - For user data files which will include
> many MP3s, OGGs and
> > > a few DVD rips (ie. mostly single large files >
> 1MB each)
> > 
> > I think putting all the OS and system files in one
> big partition is a 
> > poor choice when you have room to spare on your
> disk. I typically 
> > have the following partitions:
> 
> I disagree.  It's probably the best way.  That is,
> one partition for /
> and another for /home.  Everything else goes in one
> or the other
> partition.  Of course, another disk for backup, but
> it's off topic.

Under normal conditions I would have to disagree with
this VERY strongly, and for an example as two why I
can go back to earlier this week. FreeBSD box in my
office acting as mail server. Elsewhere in the
building umpteen Windows boxes, one of which became
virus infected on Tuesday. Windows box starts spewing
10^n th copies of itself.

Ok, so /var on the FreeBSD box gets filled, and the
mail server part of the box falls down (a pain I
"shared" with a Windows user <evil grin>), but the
other functions on the box remained up, web pages were
served off the box, name service continued, and most
importantly I could still log in and see where the
problems were. All this because /tmp and the other
directories other than /var were writeable. 

Now, there are only two situations where I would even
consider 1/2 partions. For the Linux World Canada show
I did everything into 1 partition, this was a Linux
install that was supposed to last less than 48 hours,
and Knoppix gave me the option of doing a quick/dirty
1 partition install (not ideal, but for 48 hours, I
could tolerate it). The other situation came up a few
years ago when I attempted to install a conventional
Linux on to an LS-120 floppy (a special 120 MB floppy
disk). When you only have 120 MB to play with you are
SO tight for space, you have to make some less than
ideal compromises...

For "normal" installs I want the safety of the extra
partions.

Colin McGregor

--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml