On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 02:17:45PM -0700, Jim Sibley wrote: > I'm assuming most zSeries system use a standard 3390-3 > volume (or less) for their base systems. What I've > noticed in the last few releases for zSeries and in > RHEL3 (beta) especially is the burgeoning size of > /usr. > > For SuSE SLES8, I could get by with moving /usr to a > separate volume and I could everything but the > document pdf's on the volume. > > I tried to install EVERYTHING on the redhat beta and I > had /usr on its own 3390-3 volume and the install > wizard said I needed another 1179 MB! (Being a > development shop, some of our people actually use a > lot of this stuff). > > In fact, after a pared down install, I only used 6% of > the / volume and 72% of the /usr volume! > > What alternatives do we have in the zSeries world for > this ever expanding filesystem? > > - Larger volumes on an RVA or Shark (which performance > less well with lots of data behind a single UCB - no > PAV's)? Do a lot of people use large volumes on shark > or RVA? Do a lot of people actually use the SCSI > feature of shark? > > - After building a minimal system, move /usr to an LVM > volume?
- Install /usr onto an LVM (I don't like putting / on an LVM) Yes, this is (finally) supported. RH had this supported as of 7.3. Unlike SuSE, RH puts everything under /usr (except the minimal system itself, of course): no /opt. And debian actually try to be even more strict here: cgi-bin scripts will not reside under /var/www but hopefully somewhere under /usr/share or /usr/lib and get symlinked. -- Tzafrir Cohen +---------------------------+ http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir/ |vim is a mutt's best friend| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] +---------------------------+
