From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73EE4138330 for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 17:42:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 154DA21C099; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 17:42:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smarthost03d.mail.zen.net.uk (smarthost03d.mail.zen.net.uk [212.23.1.23]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE4B721C080 for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 17:42:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [81.108.251.46] (helo=mail.digimed.co.uk) by smarthost03d.mail.zen.net.uk with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1bfW0K-0006qw-Ci for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2016 17:42:20 +0000 Received: from digimed.co.uk (fenchurch.digimed.co.uk [192.168.1.6]) by mail.digimed.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 6F59353831E for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 18:42:19 +0100 (BST) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 18:42:14 +0100 From: Neil Bothwick To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Is it still advisable to partition a big hard drive? Message-ID: <20160901184214.7905de4c@digimed.co.uk> In-Reply-To: References: <20160901095407.5d687e41@digimed.co.uk> <11891788.gD9ohsj6BR@serenity> Organization: Digital Media Production X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.14.0 (GTK+ 2.24.30; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) X-GPG-Fingerprint: 7260 0F33 97EC 2F1E 7667 FE37 BA6E 1A97 4375 1903 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Sig_/Ph9UREIN.3S2bn9Pd6+GF4d"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Originating-smarthost03d-IP: [81.108.251.46] Feedback-ID: 81.108.251.46 X-Archives-Salt: d41e9856-4784-40ee-83a0-4721d4912b74 X-Archives-Hash: 04d912407840c14333a238e9bb90bd06 --Sig_/Ph9UREIN.3S2bn9Pd6+GF4d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 1 Sep 2016 09:27:39 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: > > Honestly, I tend not to create separate partitions for separate mount > > points these days. At least, not on personal systems. For servers, > > it's can be beneficial to have /var separate from /, or /var/log > > separate from /var, or /var/spool, or /var/lib/mysql, or what have > > you. But the biggest driver for that, IME, is if one of those fills > > up, it can't take down the rest of the host. > The other big use case these days would be SSDs. I tend to have one > SSD filesystem for root, and one SSD filesystem for everything else. > That means a lot of bind mounts, but it all works. Bind mounts? I thought you would use btrfs subvolumes! --=20 Neil Bothwick Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot. --Sig_/Ph9UREIN.3S2bn9Pd6+GF4d Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iEYEARECAAYFAlfIaHYACgkQum4al0N1GQPcKgCeKCaZQK9qR5bFvSZQO9oR3GVs PCwAoMbDEE4MWYrzOqgG/MOpcHquLsGD =NLEP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/Ph9UREIN.3S2bn9Pd6+GF4d--