On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 13:43:41 -0600, Peter Steele <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes, I know what a BSD slice is compared to a BSD partition.
> Considering that fdisk uses "partition" interchangeably in
> cases with "slice", I often do as well. I guess it can be
> confusing if one isn't careful with context.
You're right - fdisk uses different terminology.
> We already have a configuration in place on our smaller 1U
> boxes which are divided into three slices, one for the OS
> (with 2 partitions), one for swap, and the third slice for
> data. The third slice is divided into two partitions, one
> UFS and one raw. The first two slices are gmirrored, the
> third slice is not.
Okay, now I understand. It's much more complex than it seemed
from your initial statement. :-)
What you want in the end is e. g.
/dev/da1s1a = /
/dev/da1s1d = /usr (or maybe /usr/local)
/dev/da1s2b = swap
/dev/da1s3d = /bigstorage (or something similar)
/dev/da1s3e = raw
> For consistency we want to use the same slice configuration
> for these large drives. We don't *have* to do it this way
> but it simplifies things for our legacy code. We're not
> using any gmirroring on these raid boxes of course, and we
> only need one partition on the third slice (no raw partition)
> but otherwise the layout will largely be the same.
Then it looks to me that using gpt / gpart is the way to go...
--
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
