| 1 |
Hello Walter Dnes, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> This setup is for a desktop PC that has "a user" not "a bunch of |
| 4 |
> users". I am *NOT* running a server with a bunch of users. If I was, |
| 5 |
> I'd be using quotas to prevent the problem described above. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
It only takes one user to have a runaway process, or even just one that |
| 8 |
uses more space than you expected, that fills /home. there are good |
| 9 |
reasons for separating user and system filesystems. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> d) more partitions means more things to go wrong |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
More partitions mean that when things go wrong, the effects are limited. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Why do you make such a big deal of not using LVM? It achieves everything |
| 16 |
you want to, and more, without the compromises. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> > you can't use different filesystems for different purposes, etc. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> You mean like ext2fs for a small rarely-written-to partition and |
| 21 |
> reiserfs for a gigantic partition with lots of files? |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
How about ReiserFS for a general purpose partition or one that has a lot |
| 24 |
of small files and XFS for a partition that has a small number of very |
| 25 |
large files (XFS's performance is much better than Reiser's with |
| 26 |
multi-gigabyte files). How about a separate partition for large temporary |
| 27 |
files (think video processing and DVD authoring) so it doesn't fill up |
| 28 |
your home or system directories. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
There are many reasons to want to keep data on a separate filesystem, |
| 31 |
which LVM achieves but your approach does not permit. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
And what happens with 500GB is no longer enough and you want to add more |
| 34 |
space. How do you resize your "partitions" to use space on the second |
| 35 |
disk? |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
-- |
| 39 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
There's more to life than sex, beer and computers. |
| 42 |
Not a lot more admittedly... |
Archives