Fewer partitions are better (Re: Disk Layout/Partitioning Practices)

[Ow Mun Heng]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dballester at kernpharma.com [mailto:dballester at kernpharma.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 5:25 PM
> To: fedora-list at redhat.com
> Subject: Re: Fewer partitions are better (Re: Disk Layout/Partitioning
> Practices)
>
> 
> Hi:
>       I understand your point of view but I disagree with 
> you. I'm sysadmin
> and I NEED to have system data and user data in three or more physical
> partitions ( at least /boot, / and /where_user-app_data_is ). 
> The reason is
> disponibility. I'm totaly agree with LVM and RAM reasons that 
> you exposed
> but having all data in / is dangerous.
>       Think about a damaged filesystem. In parititioned 
> systems, if the
> damaged filesystem is user data or /boot, I can unmount it 
> easily, repair
> it, and mount it again. If all system except /boot are in /, I need to
> shutdown the machine, startup in 'recovery mode', repair and 
> start machine.
>       In this machine, for example we can have, internal dns, 
> dhcp server,
> cups ( printing ) and samba server. Using different 
> partitions, samba user
> data can be unmounted, and printig, dns and dhcp will not be 
> affected. With
> only / I can have all people in company stopped for a while.
>       In the other hand, if the computer is for personal use, 
> It's logical
> to have all in /, no problem :)

This makes perfect sense to me.. If one fs/partition gets curruppted, 
they don't take down the whole disk..

BY far the best explanation I've read.

Cool.