Linux Partitioning

[chsh1ca]

Originally posted by: SnapIT<brNeither do i, but i would leave it at at least one GB just to be cool about it...

If you're running Apache + PHP in even any development fashion, session data gets stored there, as well as many different pieces of data retrieved from databases and such (depending on the PHP configuration). So in a large production webserver, that can be a problem. As well, most image manipulation programs do, and some rendering programs (think POVRay) utilize it, as far as I know.

As you said SnapIT, it's safer to stick it at 1 GB and then not have to worry about it.

EDIT: AAGH! Posts coming too fast!

Originally posted by: Oaf357
Okay. So 100 MB /boot should be throughly future proof, right? What about when I'm compiling the kernel?

When you are compiling the kernel, the giant source will get put wherever you decide (/usr/src/linux-ve.rs.ion is a good idea), and only the kernel image, System.map, and such need to be stuck into /boot.

The PC will be a desktop. DV editing, scanning pictures, office productivity, printing, etc. Might put up Apache and PHP for development purposes (but port 80 won't be open to the world).

In that case, you probably can ignore the giant /var I recommended in my first post, and then just work with a larger root partition. I can't think of any reason (apart from your MP3s and DV editing) that you'd need anything other than say, swap, /tmp, /boot, and root. Your DV editing could be in /tmp for simplicity's sake, and you probably want to stick your MP3s in your user's home dir, or in somewhere accessible but in a tree that makes sense (ie: /usr/local/mp3s or /usr/mp3s).

That really comes down to preference though. What filesystem do you intend on using?

 

[SnapIT]

This is going to be like /tmp with lots of random read/writes, correct? It might be worth it to increase /tmp to 50GB and use your /tmp partition for DV editing. Of course, having your own DV partition that isn't world-writeable might also be desirable. Some more info on exactly how you plan to use this box might be good -- a breakdown of everything you plan to do would help in the recommendations people will give you IMO.

That should be a pretty good solution, as the editing parts are just TMP anyway...

But yes, a total breakdown of everything would help when giving advice...

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: chsh1ca

Originally posted by: SnapIT<brNeither do i, but i would leave it at at least one GB just to be cool about it...

If you're running Apache + PHP in even any development fashion, session data gets stored there, as well as many different pieces of data retrieved from databases and such (depending on the PHP configuration). So in a large production webserver, that can be a problem. As well, most image manipulation programs do, and some rendering programs (think POVRay) utilize it, as far as I know.

As you said SnapIT, it's safer to stick it at 1 GB and then not have to worry about it.

Or as you said, stick it high and utilize it for other temporary tasks, such as audio or video editing...

The more i think about it, the more i like the idea...

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey

Originally posted by: SnapIT

I have read n0cmonkeys reasons for using OpenBSD and have my own reasons (pretty obvious) for FreeBSD, why choose NetBSD over Open or Free?

I like it. It's clean and simple. FreeBSD always seemed weird to me, confusing, or downright buggy.

The problem i had about useing Open on my desktop was that the Nvidia driver only supports Free (of course, i had to hack it anyway to load on FreeBSD 5.0)..

I don't really have a huge reason for not using OpenBSD. I guess it's probably because OpenBSD is all about security, while NetBSD has what seems to me, a broader scope. Of course security is important, but there are lots of other things that are also important. I just like the "feel" of NetBSD. I tried it out for the hell of it and happened to like it.

OpenBSD is not *just* about security. This will explain it in more detail. I am interrested in NetBSD though, and I plan on trying it eventually. And I am definitely not trying to persuade you to use OpenBSD

 

[SnapIT]

I hope that if and when i run into troubles with Open and Net i can pm you guys?

I think that most of it comforms to the same rules Free does... but anyway...

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey

Originally posted by: SnapIT

I have read n0cmonkeys reasons for using OpenBSD and have my own reasons (pretty obvious) for FreeBSD, why choose NetBSD over Open or Free?

I like it. It's clean and simple. FreeBSD always seemed weird to me, confusing, or downright buggy.

The problem i had about useing Open on my desktop was that the Nvidia driver only supports Free (of course, i had to hack it anyway to load on FreeBSD 5.0)..

I don't really have a huge reason for not using OpenBSD. I guess it's probably because OpenBSD is all about security, while NetBSD has what seems to me, a broader scope. Of course security is important, but there are lots of other things that are also important. I just like the "feel" of NetBSD. I tried it out for the hell of it and happened to like it.

I have yet to see a fault with Free that hasn't been a driver fault (which can be resolved fairly easily)...

I will do the following, i will scrap the OS X (which i hate with a vengance) and quadro boot it between Open, Free, Net and Slackware...

Eventually i will decide...... i hope...

That might not be the best idea. I don't know about NetBSD or FreeBSD, but OpenBSD's kernel typically needs to be near the beginning of the drive. If I were going to choose two, I would probably go slack and Free right now. But since you know each of those, Net and Open might be the best choice. Atleast for a month

We all have our own resons... BTW, if you like phoenix, the latest builds for Net and Open are very stable...

I look forward to trying it on OpenBSD. I'll be waiting for my 3.3 cds to arrive though

 

[n0cmonkey]

/home is a good one to keep on its own too. I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm using quite a bit of mine (OpenBSD).

$ df -h
Filesystem Size Used Avail Capacity Mounted on
/dev/sd0a 484M 42M 418M 9% /
/dev/sd0d 992M 891M 52M 95% /usr
/dev/sd0e 496M 3.0K 471M 0% /tmp
/dev/sd0f 992M 396M 547M 42% /var
/dev/sd0g 1.9G 527M 1.3G 28% /usr/local
/dev/sd0h 27G 21G 5.4G 79% /home

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: SnapIT
I hope that if and when i run into troubles with Open and Net i can pm you guys?

I think that most of it comforms to the same rules Free does... but anyway...

RTFM newbie.



Yeah, you can PM me or start a thread. I prefer threads because it helps more people out. But I guess, if we posted a summary to the Linux FAQ thread after a PM session it couldn't be all bad right?

 

[Oaf357]

Basically it's going to be my current abilities in Windows moved in to Linux. Everything that I could do in Windows will have to be able to be accomplished in Linux (obviously). This is my home, desktop PC (a rather large, old, reliable, custom built PC).

Hardware:

Asus A7V Mobo
AMD T-Bird 1.1 GHz Proc
384 MB RAM
ATI Radeon VE graphics card
200 GB and a 20 GB HDD (ATA-100)
SoundBlaster Audigy MP3+ (Firewire port is on card)
NIC: Linksys LNE100TX
DVD: Lite-On DVD-ROM Drive
CDRW: Lite-On 32x CDRW Drive
Printer: HP DeskJet 5550 (USB 1.1, USB 2.0 capable)
Scanner: CanoScan LiDE 30 (USB 1.1, USB 2.0 capable)
Camcorder: Canon ZR45MC (Firewire)
Webcam: Logitech QuickCam Express (USB 1.1)
Mouse: Microsoft IntelliMouse Explorer (USB 1.1)

Basically I want to be able to use each piece of hardware to the fullest of its ability. DV editing will be the most intensive function of the PC. I also do web design as well as photo editing, graphics editing/creation with this PC (last year's family Christmas cards were put out on the DeskJet). We often copy photos and print them out so that we can zoom and crop at will. As I mentioned earlier there will be an Apache and PHP install just so I can test pages to web sites out before I make them live and that server will not be accessible to the outside world.

I hope that helps.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey

Originally posted by: SnapIT

I have read n0cmonkeys reasons for using OpenBSD and have my own reasons (pretty obvious) for FreeBSD, why choose NetBSD over Open or Free?

I like it. It's clean and simple. FreeBSD always seemed weird to me, confusing, or downright buggy.

The problem i had about useing Open on my desktop was that the Nvidia driver only supports Free (of course, i had to hack it anyway to load on FreeBSD 5.0)..

I don't really have a huge reason for not using OpenBSD. I guess it's probably because OpenBSD is all about security, while NetBSD has what seems to me, a broader scope. Of course security is important, but there are lots of other things that are also important. I just like the "feel" of NetBSD. I tried it out for the hell of it and happened to like it.

I have yet to see a fault with Free that hasn't been a driver fault (which can be resolved fairly easily)...

I will do the following, i will scrap the OS X (which i hate with a vengance) and quadro boot it between Open, Free, Net and Slackware...

Eventually i will decide...... i hope...

That might not be the best idea. I don't know about NetBSD or FreeBSD, but OpenBSD's kernel typically needs to be near the beginning of the drive. If I were going to choose two, I would probably go slack and Free right now. But since you know each of those, Net and Open might be the best choice. Atleast for a month

We all have our own resons... BTW, if you like phoenix, the latest builds for Net and Open are very stable...

I look forward to trying it on OpenBSD. I'll be waiting for my 3.3 cds to arrive though

Yeah, you're right, i really don't need to know more about Free and Slack, i got it on my desktop anyways... so... Net and Open it is...

I hope you will like it, if you have any problems with it, just pm... remember, you can still use your skins and extensions... (although an installer is needed as a new version kills older settings, skins an extensions)...

It's still the Gecko engine, but IMO (for obvious reasons it's vastly superior...

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: SnapIT
I hope that if and when i run into troubles with Open and Net i can pm you guys?

I think that most of it comforms to the same rules Free does... but anyway...

RTFM newbie.



Yeah, you can PM me or start a thread. I prefer threads because it helps more people out. But I guess, if we posted a summary to the Linux FAQ thread after a PM session it couldn't be all bad right?

I have read it, but i tend to have "unusual" problems...

I would RTFM but i don't know how to read...

 

[Oaf357]

Originally posted by: chsh1ca

Originally posted by: SnapIT<brNeither do i, but i would leave it at at least one GB just to be cool about it...

If you're running Apache + PHP in even any development fashion, session data gets stored there, as well as many different pieces of data retrieved from databases and such (depending on the PHP configuration). So in a large production webserver, that can be a problem. As well, most image manipulation programs do, and some rendering programs (think POVRay) utilize it, as far as I know.

As you said SnapIT, it's safer to stick it at 1 GB and then not have to worry about it.

EDIT: AAGH! Posts coming too fast!

Originally posted by: Oaf357
Okay. So 100 MB /boot should be throughly future proof, right? What about when I'm compiling the kernel?

When you are compiling the kernel, the giant source will get put wherever you decide (/usr/src/linux-ve.rs.ion is a good idea), and only the kernel image, System.map, and such need to be stuck into /boot.

The PC will be a desktop. DV editing, scanning pictures, office productivity, printing, etc. Might put up Apache and PHP for development purposes (but port 80 won't be open to the world).

In that case, you probably can ignore the giant /var I recommended in my first post, and then just work with a larger root partition. I can't think of any reason (apart from your MP3s and DV editing) that you'd need anything other than say, swap, /tmp, /boot, and root. Your DV editing could be in /tmp for simplicity's sake, and you probably want to stick your MP3s in your user's home dir, or in somewhere accessible but in a tree that makes sense (ie: /usr/local/mp3s or /usr/mp3s).

That really comes down to preference though. What filesystem do you intend on using?

The idea behind the DV editing partition is for there to be nothing in it unless you're editing a video. So I could essentially tell those DV editing programs to use that space as /tmp (right?). Same with the MP3 (or Music) partition. I'm just not comfortable with telling the wife, "Just use /tmp to edit that movie in, okay." Keeping it as simple as possible for her is the idea. It's a really great idea though and it will most definitely be in the back of my head but it would require the wife to obtain a respect for Linux that most people can't obtain initially. Keeping the wife out of the inner-workings of the OS (myself too at times) is a good idea until she can grasp some basic things.

As for filesystem. I'm probably going to run with ext3 just because of its tenure and support. ext2 has been good to me in the past so ext3 should work out well.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Oaf357

As for filesystem. I'm probably going to run with ext3 just because of its tenure and support. ext2 has been good to me in the past so ext3 should work out well.

Just a thought, but look at XFS. Depending on the latest rumblings, it might offer the best performance for DV editting. But definitely check around and see what other people are saying about it.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Oaf357

As for filesystem. I'm probably going to run with ext3 just because of its tenure and support. ext2 has been good to me in the past so ext3 should work out well.

Just a thought, but look at XFS. Depending on the latest rumblings, it might offer the best performance for DV editting. But definitely check around and see what other people are saying about it.

XFS is a better choice for video editing IMO... based on the limited experience with video editing i have...

 

[Oaf357]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Oaf357

As for filesystem. I'm probably going to run with ext3 just because of its tenure and support. ext2 has been good to me in the past so ext3 should work out well.

Just a thought, but look at XFS. Depending on the latest rumblings, it might offer the best performance for DV editting. But definitely check around and see what other people are saying about it.

Performance for each specific function will vary by filesystem. If I were doing database work I'd go with ReiserFS, for example. But this PC will do a little bit of everything eventually, from games to databases to DV editing.

Support and available utilities is why I'm leaning more towards ext3. That and they fact it's the filesystem of choice of the major distros.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Oaf357

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Oaf357

As for filesystem. I'm probably going to run with ext3 just because of its tenure and support. ext2 has been good to me in the past so ext3 should work out well.

Just a thought, but look at XFS. Depending on the latest rumblings, it might offer the best performance for DV editting. But definitely check around and see what other people are saying about it.

Performance for each specific function will vary by filesystem. If I were doing database work I'd go with ReiserFS, for example. But this PC will do a little bit of everything eventually, from games to databases to DV editing.

Support and available utilities is why I'm leaning more towards ext3. That and they fact it's the filesystem of choice of the major distros.

I wouldn't touch ReiserFS with a 10mB hard drive Just personal opinion though.

XFS has other benefits than just possible performance. ext3 is good though.

 

[Oaf357]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Oaf357

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Oaf357

As for filesystem. I'm probably going to run with ext3 just because of its tenure and support. ext2 has been good to me in the past so ext3 should work out well.

Just a thought, but look at XFS. Depending on the latest rumblings, it might offer the best performance for DV editting. But definitely check around and see what other people are saying about it.

Performance for each specific function will vary by filesystem. If I were doing database work I'd go with ReiserFS, for example. But this PC will do a little bit of everything eventually, from games to databases to DV editing.

Support and available utilities is why I'm leaning more towards ext3. That and they fact it's the filesystem of choice of the major distros.

I wouldn't touch ReiserFS with a 10mB hard drive Just personal opinion though.

XFS has other benefits than just possible performance. ext3 is good though.

Agreed the question is would it make sense to have the DV partition on XFS and the other partitions on ext3?

 

[Oaf357]

Or better yet.

What would provide the best throughput for extracting DV via firewire from a camcorder and would it be beneficial to setup that one partition to that filesystem and everything else to another?

 

[Nothinman]

disclaimer: I didn't read the entire thread =)

I use XFS on all my partitions, I don't see a reason to mix filesystems unless you are messing with them or need compatibility with another OS.

/tmp generally doesn't need to be very big, but some things (like VMWare which I run quite frequnetly) needs a large /tmp. Most decent apps will let you redirect their /tmp usage somewhere else, but you'd have to see if the app supports that.

A totally seperate drive for the DV capture would be best, but a seperate partition would be better than nothing. Constantly creating and deleting gigs of data is the best way to fragment a filesystem and if that happens XFS does have xfs_fsr to defrag the data extents.

 

[Oaf357]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
disclaimer: I didn't read the entire thread =)

I use XFS on all my partitions, I don't see a reason to mix filesystems unless you are messing with them or need compatibility with another OS.

/tmp generally doesn't need to be very big, but some things (like VMWare which I run quite frequnetly) needs a large /tmp. Most decent apps will let you redirect their /tmp usage somewhere else, but you'd have to see if the app supports that.

A totally seperate drive for the DV capture would be best, but a seperate partition would be better than nothing. Constantly creating and deleting gigs of data is the best way to fragment a filesystem and if that happens XFS does have xfs_fsr to defrag the data extents.

I agree that a seperate drive would be best. But that isn't really too much of an option (financially).

I think I'll just stick with ext3 (across the board) unless there is a significant advantage over ext3 for general purpose (little bit of everything) use by another fs.

The /tmp partition is still a big stumbling block (IMO) one gig should work but is that future proof? How exactly will Linux work with /tmp if it fills up? How much space does VMWare suck up in /tmp? I'm trying to minimize potential fragmentation by putting /tmp on its own partition.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Oaf357

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Oaf357

As for filesystem. I'm probably going to run with ext3 just because of its tenure and support. ext2 has been good to me in the past so ext3 should work out well.

Just a thought, but look at XFS. Depending on the latest rumblings, it might offer the best performance for DV editting. But definitely check around and see what other people are saying about it.

Performance for each specific function will vary by filesystem. If I were doing database work I'd go with ReiserFS, for example. But this PC will do a little bit of everything eventually, from games to databases to DV editing.

Support and available utilities is why I'm leaning more towards ext3. That and they fact it's the filesystem of choice of the major distros.

I wouldn't touch ReiserFS with a 10mB hard drive Just personal opinion though.

XFS has other benefits than just possible performance. ext3 is good though.

Care to explain where you got that opinion from?

 

[Oaf357]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Oaf357

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Oaf357

As for filesystem. I'm probably going to run with ext3 just because of its tenure and support. ext2 has been good to me in the past so ext3 should work out well.

Just a thought, but look at XFS. Depending on the latest rumblings, it might offer the best performance for DV editting. But definitely check around and see what other people are saying about it.

Performance for each specific function will vary by filesystem. If I were doing database work I'd go with ReiserFS, for example. But this PC will do a little bit of everything eventually, from games to databases to DV editing.

Support and available utilities is why I'm leaning more towards ext3. That and they fact it's the filesystem of choice of the major distros.

I wouldn't touch ReiserFS with a 10mB hard drive Just personal opinion though.

XFS has other benefits than just possible performance. ext3 is good though.

Care to explain where you got that opinion from?

From what I've read, people either love or hate Reiser. They love it because of what it touts on their web page or they hate it because it uses "plug-ins" and is actually slower than ext3 in a lot of cases. Of course, that's just what I've seen from my research.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: Oaf357

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Oaf357

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Oaf357

As for filesystem. I'm probably going to run with ext3 just because of its tenure and support. ext2 has been good to me in the past so ext3 should work out well.

Just a thought, but look at XFS. Depending on the latest rumblings, it might offer the best performance for DV editting. But definitely check around and see what other people are saying about it.

Performance for each specific function will vary by filesystem. If I were doing database work I'd go with ReiserFS, for example. But this PC will do a little bit of everything eventually, from games to databases to DV editing.

Support and available utilities is why I'm leaning more towards ext3. That and they fact it's the filesystem of choice of the major distros.

I wouldn't touch ReiserFS with a 10mB hard drive Just personal opinion though.

XFS has other benefits than just possible performance. ext3 is good though.

Care to explain where you got that opinion from?

From what I've read, people either love or hate Reiser. They love it because of what it touts on their web page or they hate it because it uses "plug-ins" and is actually slower than ext3 in a lot of cases. Of course, that's just what I've seen from my research.

And in a lot of other cases it is faster, that response was unexpected, i didn't expect you to provide a negative answer based on hearsay...

Reiser FS does what it was meant to do, it is a safe journaling FS, for some apps fast, for some slower... it is to be expected, but don't slam it until you have tried it...

I have used Reiser since before ext3 because it was simple to install and it provided better security and redundancy... now there are so many to choose from, but Reiser has always done it's job for me...

 

[Oaf357]

I wasn't the person you were asking the question to (I just chimed in). But, the plug-in thing is what would keep me away from it. I don't like WinAmp plugins let alone filesystem plug-ins. That's my opinion of course and YMMV.

I also went hunting for benchmarks and found several benchmarks that said Reiser was slower in numerous tests that would be somewhat close the the environment I'll be dealing with. Reiser did beat the pants off of just about everything else once you had a fortune 500 corporate mail server amount of disk access but let's get real, who has that on their desktop?

 

[Nothinman]

The /tmp partition is still a big stumbling block (IMO) one gig should work but is that future proof? How exactly will Linux work with /tmp if it fills up? How much space does VMWare suck up in /tmp? I'm trying to minimize potential fragmentation by putting /tmp on its own partition.

Once it's full programs that try to create files there fail, the kernel itself doesn't use it so the whole OS won't die but apps will probably die strangely. VMWare creates a tmp file the size of the amount of memory you gave to the OS, so if you allocate it 256M you just got 256M taken from /tmp.

From what I've read, people either love or hate Reiser. They love it because of what it touts on their web page or they hate it because it uses "plug-ins" and is actually slower than ext3 in a lot of cases. Of course, that's just what I've seen from my research.

I like the plug-in idea, actually the whole fs seems really nice from a design standpoint. But they can't make up their f'ing minds, reiserfs 3.5->3.6 had an on-disk format change and now reiser4 is a total rewrite. Sorry, but I like my filesystem development stable. If they can ever get a revision they're satisfied with I could see reiserfs become the defacto standard, but until development stabilizes there's a lot of people that won't be using it.