Re: Partitioning schemes for partman-auto
On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 12:48:52AM +0200, Anton Zinoviev wrote: Hi! I have told newbie installers to create as the first partition a small 50 MB for /boot, then swap 200% RAM and the rest root. The /boot is there to avoid problems with 1024 cylider limit for placing the kernel image on PC machines. This works, and uses only three partitions, so IDE disk users can still create a fourth for some other operating system or for /home. -- Tapio Lehtonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG public key from http://www.iki.fi/Tapio.Lehtonen http://www.taleman.fi/ IT-alan asiantuntijapalvelut Porissa pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Partitioning schemes for partman-auto
Hi! So far we have two usefull partitioning schemes. Please review the numbers and the names of the schemes (the names will be shown to the users in a menu). = Name: All files in one partition (recommended for new users) Minimal Typical Maximal / 1000Mb 10GbGb swap 64Mb512Mb 512Mb = Name: Separate home directories (future installations can preserve users data) Minimal Typical Maximal / 300Mb 3Gb 7Gb /home 100Mb 10Gb1000Gb swap 64Mb400%512Mb = I was thinking also for a partitioning scheme that tries to follow the recommendations in Securing Debian Manual, but as Falk Hueffner pointed, more advanced partitioning schemes are used by people who do this stuff manually. Anton Zinoviev -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Partitioning schemes for partman-auto
Anton Zinoviev wrote: Hi! So far we have two usefull partitioning schemes. Please review the numbers and the names of the schemes (the names will be shown to the users in a menu). = Name: All files in one partition (recommended for new users) Minimal Typical Maximal / 1000Mb 10GbGb I think more like 500 mb should do for minimal. swap 64Mb512Mb 512Mb = Name: Separate home directories (future installations can preserve users data) I think that the bit in parens here is too complicated. Users are probably not thinking about future installations when installing Debian and autopartitioning. Minimal Typical Maximal / 300Mb 3Gb 7Gb /home 100Mb 10Gb1000Gb swap 64Mb400%512Mb = I was thinking also for a partitioning scheme that tries to follow the recommendations in Securing Debian Manual, but as Falk Hueffner pointed, more advanced partitioning schemes are used by people who do this stuff manually. There might be something to be said for just slapping on one large partition or some other suitable generic scheme and not asking the user for a scheme at all in high priority. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Partitioning schemes for partman-auto
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 07:06:13PM +0200, Anton Zinoviev wrote: Name: Separate home directories (future installations can preserve users data) Minimal Typical Maximal / 300Mb 3Gb 7Gb /home 100Mb 10Gb1000Gb swap 64Mb400%512Mb = IME, the typical and maximal settings here are weighted too heavily towards the /home partition. My desktop is very close to 7GB outside of /home, and I don't even have any of the typical large stuff in /var (mail/news spools, web caches, etc). If you're going to have a maximal setting of 1000GB for /home, I would recommend at least 100GB for /, and would suggest at least 5GB for typical. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Partitioning schemes for partman-auto
On 1.III.2004 at 20:10 Falk Hueffner wrote: Swap nowadays only serve to spill pages that haven't been accessed for hours, or to slow down the system enough so you can kill processes gone haywire; therefore, it is not performance critical and a swap file will do just fine and is more flexible WRT resizing. I can remember the installer of Red Hat saying that the swap must be always at least as much as the available RAM even if there is enough RAM. Without swap the performance of the system would be degraded. Do you know if this is true? Anton Zinoviev -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Partitioning schemes for partman-auto
Anton Zinoviev [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On 1.III.2004 at 20:10 Falk Hueffner wrote: Swap nowadays only serve to spill pages that haven't been accessed for hours, or to slow down the system enough so you can kill processes gone haywire; therefore, it is not performance critical and a swap file will do just fine and is more flexible WRT resizing. I can remember the installer of Red Hat saying that the swap must be always at least as much as the available RAM even if there is enough RAM. Without swap the performance of the system would be degraded. Do you know if this is true? I dimly recall there used to be a bug in older kernel releases to this effect. I don't believe it is relevant any more. If it was, I'd certainly consider it a kernel bug. -- Falk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Partitioning schemes for partman-auto
Anton Zinoviev wrote: Hi! The partitioning schemes of partman-auto currently are only examples. So if you have some idea for usefull partitioning just tell it. I have to know what partitions your scheme has and an example size of each partition as well as the minimal and the maximal usefull size. For example: Minimal Typical Maximal / 50Mb300Mb 300Mb /usr 1Gb 3Gb 5Gb /var 100Mb 500Mb 1000Mb A print job for, say, a high-resolution ink printer can easily flood /var in this scheme. Thiemo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Partitioning schemes for partman-auto
Anton Zinoviev [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The partitioning schemes of partman-auto currently are only examples. So if you have some idea for usefull partitioning just tell it. I have to know what partitions your scheme has and an example size of each partition as well as the minimal and the maximal usefull size. For example: This is the only partitioning scheme which in my opinion fits for users who might go with whatever the default is: / Whole harddisk swapnone, but 512M swap file (independent of memory) Rationale: I don't see any noticeable benefit for Jane User in having lots of small partitions; and as has been pointed out it always either wastes space or is prone to overruns. Swap nowadays only serve to spill pages that haven't been accessed for hours, or to slow down the system enough so you can kill processes gone haywire; therefore, it is not performance critical and a swap file will do just fine and is more flexible WRT resizing. -- Falk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Partitioning schemes for partman-auto
Falk Hueffner wrote: This is the only partitioning scheme which in my opinion fits for users who might go with whatever the default is: / Whole harddisk swapnone, but 512M swap file (independent of memory) I also wouldn't mind having this scheme available, although I think the current simple scheme (/, /home, /swap) is also useful. Swap nowadays only serve to spill pages that haven't been accessed for hours, or to slow down the system enough so you can kill processes gone haywire; therefore, it is not performance critical and a swap file will do just fine and is more flexible WRT resizing. Not true for many of our target architectures and systems. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Partitioning schemes for partman-auto
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Falk Hueffner wrote: This is the only partitioning scheme which in my opinion fits for users who might go with whatever the default is: / Whole harddisk swapnone, but 512M swap file (independent of memory) I also wouldn't mind having this scheme available, although I think the current simple scheme (/, /home, /swap) is also useful. Fine as long as there is some help text which makes the choice trivially obvious. That seems hard. Swap nowadays only serve to spill pages that haven't been accessed for hours, or to slow down the system enough so you can kill processes gone haywire; therefore, it is not performance critical and a swap file will do just fine and is more flexible WRT resizing. Not true for many of our target architectures and systems. Those are used by people who do this stuff manually anyway. -- Falk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Partitioning schemes for partman-auto
Hi! The partitioning schemes of partman-auto currently are only examples. So if you have some idea for usefull partitioning just tell it. I have to know what partitions your scheme has and an example size of each partition as well as the minimal and the maximal usefull size. For example: Minimal Typical Maximal / 50Mb300Mb 300Mb /usr 1Gb 3Gb 5Gb /var 100Mb 500Mb 1000Mb /home 100Mb 10Gb1000Gb swap 100%400%2Gb (The percents are relatively the RAM.) If you want you can also specify symbolic links (although partman doesn't support them yet). For example this is the scheme I usualy use: Minimal Typical Maximal / 300Mb 3Gb 7Gb /home 100Mb 10Gb1000Gb swap 100%400%2Gb /usr/local -- /home/local /opt -- /home/opt /var/www - /home/www /var/mail - /home/mail Anton Zinoviev -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
