Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.hardware > #3145
| From | Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.hardware |
| Subject | Re: maximum number of partitions |
| Followup-To | comp.os.linux.hardware |
| Date | 2016-06-06 16:48 +0200 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Strider |
| Message-ID | <nj42fd$dfa$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (14 earlier) <nj1at0$i32$1@dont-email.me> <nj1ccf$96q$1@dont-email.me> <nj1sei$iho$1@dont-email.me> <87lh2j5mdw.fsf@hemphills.net> <nj4069$vl9$1@dont-email.me> |
Followups directed to: comp.os.linux.hardware
On Monday 06 Jun 2016 16:09, Henrik Carlqvist conveyed the following to
comp.os.linux.hardware...
> On Sun, 05 Jun 2016 17:58:03 -0400, Scott Hemphill wrote:
>> I would normally think of physical extents as the allocation unit for
>> a volume group.
>
> Thanks also for this explanation and the example which followed!
>
>> Voila! I now had an 80GB root filesystem without rebooting
>> a production machine!
>
> Yes, I see the point with being able to easily expand file systems on
> logical volumes. But IMHO the drawback of relying on this
> functionality is that it might tempt you to place almost your entire
> directory tree on a single file system.
Even without LVM, many people are tempted to do it that way, because
most GNU/Linux users today come from the world of Microsoft Windows, and
Windows installs everything in a single partition (and filesystem). So
does Apple OS X, by the way, even though technically ─ because of its
UNIX roots ─ it should be able to set things up differently there.
> The importance of having a small root file system might not be as
> important today with journaled file systems as it once used to be, but
> I still think that it feels safe to know that I will most likely be
> able to boot to single user mode and fsck all other file systems in
> case of power outage.
You can still have the root filesystem on an LVM volume, provided that
/boot is on a separate (and regular) partition ─ GRUB doesn't recognize
an LVM, although LILO might work.
That said however, having a small root filesystem has become very hard
these days due to all of the libraries and firmware blobs. This is why
RedHat and Fedora have begun implementing "the /usr move", where all of
those libraries and all binaries from the root filesystem are now moved
to under /usr ─ i.e. /bin, /lib{,64} and /sbin are now symbolic links to
their counterparts under the /usr hierarchy.
> Also, when different directory trees gets filled up to 100% different
> kind of bad stuff will happen. If /var/log gets filled up you will no
> longer get any logs... If /home gets filled up you will no longer be
> able to start any new X applications... If / gets filled up you will
> no longer be able to mount or umount any file systems.
>
> If all your directory trees lives in the same file system and that
> file system gets filled up all bad stuff will happen at once.
>
> My own / partition is 510 MB and that also includes the /boot
> directory.
My root partition is 466 MiB, of which 369 MiB is in use. I do have a
separate /boot partition of 309 MiB, of which only 51 MiB is in use at
the moment.
I've also got separate filesystems for /usr, /usr/local, /opt, /var,
/srv, /srv/mmedia/movies, /home, plus that the contents of /tmp live on
a tmpfs.
Each of these filesystems is mounted with custom mount options. For
instance, /boot, /usr, /usr/local and /opt are mounted read-only at boot
time. The root filesystem is mounted read/write at boot time, but gets
remounted read-only later on by rc.local because of two unrelated bugs
which both write junk to the root directory. /tmp is mounted with
noexec, and everything except for /dev is mounted with nodev. /home is
mounted with nosuid.
/root is a symlink to /home/root because there's a bug in the system so
that if you boot up in (or drop down to) runlevel 1, then it doesn't use
/root as the root user's home anyway ─ this is one of the two bugs which
periodically cause junk to be written to the root directory ─ and
instead it'll then use / as the superuser's home. So there was no point
in keeping /root on the root filesystem anymore, and this allows for the
root filesystem to be remounted read-only after all of the other boot
scripts have completed.
I don't have to drop down to runlevel 1 all that often, though. My
computer either way boots up to runlevel 3 and I start X manually after
login, so I can get away with doing most administrative stuff from
runlevel 3 without X running. ;)
Note: This is of course with a traditional sysvinit. I know you're
using Slackware, which has a BSD-style init, and distros with
systemd will of course also have different runlevel
implementations.
> My biggest partition is /var/images at 101G where I keep
> some iso- and hd- images I use with qemu.
My biggest partition is /home, with a 525 GiB capacity. However, only
5.6 GiB of that is currently in use. I've put all of my multimedia
stuff under /srv ─ that way, all user accounts have (read-only) access
to it and I've also cleaned out all the .iso files that I used to keep
under my $HOME.
--
= Aragorn =
http://www.linuxcounter.net - registrant #223157
Back to comp.os.linux.hardware | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
maximum number of partitions Haines Brown <haines@engels.histomat.net> - 2016-05-26 13:16 -0400
Re: maximum number of partitions "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-05-26 20:22 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Haines Brown <haines@engels.histomat.net> - 2016-05-26 16:02 -0400
Re: maximum number of partitions Henrik Carlqvist <Henrik.Carlqvist@deadspam.com> - 2016-05-26 21:02 +0000
Re: maximum number of partitions "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-05-27 00:36 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Haines Brown <haines@engels.histomat.net> - 2016-05-27 07:08 -0400
Re: maximum number of partitions floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) - 2016-05-27 04:03 -0800
Re: maximum number of partitions Haines Brown <haines@engels.histomat.net> - 2016-05-27 09:25 -0400
Re: maximum number of partitions floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) - 2016-05-27 05:53 -0800
Re: maximum number of partitions Haines Brown <haines@engels.histomat.net> - 2016-05-27 12:48 -0400
Re: maximum number of partitions "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-05-27 14:50 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Vilmos Soti <vilmos@soti.ca> - 2016-05-26 12:40 -0700
Re: maximum number of partitions Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2016-05-26 22:29 +0200
LVM [was: maximum number of partitions] Haines Brown <haines@engels.histomat.net> - 2016-05-27 07:44 -0400
Re: LVM [was: maximum number of partitions] Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2016-05-27 18:07 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2016-05-26 22:27 +0100
Re: maximum number of partitions Henrik Carlqvist <Henrik.Carlqvist@deadspam.com> - 2016-05-27 06:05 +0000
Re: maximum number of partitions Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2016-05-27 08:36 +0100
Re: maximum number of partitions "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-05-27 12:17 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Henrik Carlqvist <Henrik.Carlqvist@deadspam.com> - 2016-05-27 18:49 +0000
Re: maximum number of partitions Robert Nichols <SEE_SIGNATURE@localhost.localdomain.invalid> - 2016-05-27 19:08 -0500
Re: maximum number of partitions Henrik Carlqvist <Henrik.Carlqvist@deadspam.com> - 2016-05-28 07:11 +0000
Re: maximum number of partitions Robert Nichols <SEE_SIGNATURE@localhost.localdomain.invalid> - 2016-05-28 09:22 -0500
Re: maximum number of partitions Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2016-05-27 10:07 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2016-05-27 18:07 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-05-27 20:30 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2016-05-28 00:05 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-05-28 04:45 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2016-05-28 07:26 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Henrik Carlqvist <Henrik.Carlqvist@deadspam.com> - 2016-05-28 07:15 +0000
Re: maximum number of partitions Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2016-05-28 10:25 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Henrik Carlqvist <Henrik.Carlqvist@deadspam.com> - 2016-05-28 11:14 +0000
Re: maximum number of partitions Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2016-05-28 13:52 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2016-05-28 18:46 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2016-05-28 19:57 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2016-05-28 20:15 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2016-05-28 12:04 -0700
Re: maximum number of partitions Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2016-05-28 22:47 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2016-05-29 07:36 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-05-29 13:48 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-06-04 09:50 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Henrik Carlqvist <Henrik.Carlqvist@deadspam.com> - 2016-06-05 10:10 +0000
Re: maximum number of partitions Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Henrik Carlqvist <Henrik.Carlqvist@deadspam.com> - 2016-06-05 13:53 +0000
Re: maximum number of partitions Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2016-06-05 16:18 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Henrik Carlqvist <Henrik.Carlqvist@deadspam.com> - 2016-06-05 18:53 +0000
Re: maximum number of partitions Scott Hemphill <hemphill@hemphills.net> - 2016-06-05 17:58 -0400
Re: maximum number of partitions Henrik Carlqvist <Henrik.Carlqvist@deadspam.com> - 2016-06-06 14:09 +0000
Re: maximum number of partitions Scott Hemphill <hemphill@hemphills.net> - 2016-06-06 10:32 -0400
Re: maximum number of partitions Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2016-06-06 16:48 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-06-08 22:23 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2016-06-06 15:55 +0100
Re: maximum number of partitions Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2016-06-06 17:41 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2016-06-06 17:23 +0100
Re: maximum number of partitions "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-06-06 22:36 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2016-06-06 21:51 +0100
Re: maximum number of partitions Henrik Carlqvist <Henrik.Carlqvist@deadspam.com> - 2016-06-07 04:54 +0000
Re: maximum number of partitions Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2016-06-07 08:43 +0100
Re: maximum number of partitions Henrik Carlqvist <Henrik.Carlqvist@deadspam.com> - 2016-06-07 19:04 +0000
Re: maximum number of partitions Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2016-06-07 20:30 +0100
Re: maximum number of partitions Henrik Carlqvist <Henrik.Carlqvist@deadspam.com> - 2016-06-08 07:08 +0000
Re: maximum number of partitions Henrik Carlqvist <Henrik.Carlqvist@deadspam.com> - 2016-06-06 15:50 +0000
Re: maximum number of partitions "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-06-05 16:03 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions noSpam@gmail.com - 2016-07-18 18:57 +0000
Re: maximum number of partitions "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-05-28 17:10 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2016-05-28 18:07 +0100
Re: maximum number of partitions "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-05-28 21:33 +0200
Re: maximum number of partitions novinhael@gmail.com - 2017-02-07 18:10 -0800
Re: maximum number of partitions Robert Nichols <SEE_SIGNATURE@localhost.localdomain.invalid> - 2017-02-08 07:58 -0600
Re: maximum number of partitions faeychild <faeychild@nomail.afraid.org> - 2017-02-13 15:23 +1100
Re: maximum number of partitions "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2017-02-13 08:04 +0100
Re: maximum number of partitions "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2017-02-13 08:12 +0100
csiph-web