[Linux] Hard Drive Partitions

[Javier Lombillo]

Yet more advice:

Don't bother with a partitioning scheme, just throw the entire
filesystem on one partition (and the swap -- go for a full GB -- on
another).  You'll figure out how you like to store things, and then,
if you want, on your next install you can partition appropriately.
What's the disadvantage to the lump it all in one partition approach?
If you plan on reinstalling the OS, you'll need to save off-disk
anything you want to keep across the reinstall (such as your /home
directory).  But you'll be backing up off-disk regularly anyway,
right? :)

Or:

Some distributions let you install onto LVM, the logical volume
manager for Linux.  With LVM, it's easy to shrink or grow partitions
at any time.  You can also add new disks to the group, thus giving you
ultimate flexibility.  The big disadvantage here is when the disks
physically fail -- LVM makes it more difficult to salvage data post
mortem.  Of course, you can add two more disks and run RAID 5
underneath LVM, which should help you sleep at night.

Bottom line: You can break that 320 GB up in a lot of ways, but if you
pick something "permanent", it's a safe bet that in 6 months you'll be
thinking to yourself, "I should've done it differently."

j


On 3/17/07, Bill McCarthy <mccarthybill@comcast.net> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> I'm new to the group and attended my first meeting in March.  I've been
> messing around with Linux for a couple of years now, but I'd still
> consider myself as being new.  I've got a couple of questions that I
> hope someone might be able to answer.
>
> 1. Partitioning Scheme.  I've read in a couple of places,
> recommendations for partitioning the file system and the reasons for
> that.  The books I've read suggest placing /, /boot, /var, /tmp, /usr,
> /home, and swap (twice the amount of RAM) all in different partitions.
> What I haven't found is size recommendations.  I would assume that I'd
> make /home whatever is left after creating all the other partitions, but
> I don't really know how large to make the other partitions, so that they
> would have enough space to allow for expansion to install more
> software.  Drive space really isn't a problem for me, I've just
> purchased a 320 GB drive and have several 120 GB drives kicking around.
> Could someone suggest some sizes?
>
> 2.  32 bit vs. 64 bit.  My second question is What benefit do I get from
> a 64 bit OS beyond the addressable memory space?  I recently built a box
> with an AMD Athalon 64 X2 processor with 2 GB of ram.  (This is the box
> in which I intend to install the new drive.)  I installed Ubuntu64.  I
> noticed that my CD ripping and encoding went much faster, but I
> attributed that to the dual cores.  Beyond this though I haven't noticed
> any significant difference, other than not as many programs available
> for the 64 bit OS.  Any thoughts?
>
> Thanks for the Help
> Bill McCarthy
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux mailing list
> Linux@flux.org
> http://www.flux.org/mailman/listinfo/linux
>