Re: Re: Main server partitioning strategy

[Jim Noble <yahoo-groups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

David Greaves wrote:

> yep
> Personally I'd suggest having a single space and then you either run
out
> of room or you don't.
> I used to hate running out of room for CDs with ton's of video space
> left etc...


The problem with that is sooner or later zoneminder will eat it all :-)

Ok, so I could write a filter to keep the disc usage down, or I could
just point it at a 100Gb Logical Volume and use the default filter to
clean up when it's full ;-)

> Then use rsync to backup the data from the .../user/ tree when you
> need to.
> This does mean you can't do 'snapshots' - but I doubt you'd want to :)


Snapshots could be useful to me actually, as the only offline backups I
can do at the moment are to DVD...

> >
> > Just one more question, Ext3, XFS, or ReiserFS? Or ...?
> Just  don't use ext2 (or, IMHO) ext3.
> They aren't the best for large filesystems (slow mkfs, mount time fsck
> every 30 mounts etc- ugh!)
> I only suggest XFS. Other people like JFS or Rieser.
> All these will do a mkfs or fsck in around a second (eg on my 1.2Tb
xfs)
> Complete filesystem checks take a lot longer but they're the same for
> all fs and only needed if you have corruption somehow.
> If you're a fiddler and want to resize volumes then you need a
resizable
> filesystem. All fs will grow (AFAIK) but some (like XFS) won't shrink.


I'm going to use ext3 for "normal" data and zoneminder (for the
reliability), and probably XFS for video, cd & dvd rips etc (for the
large file handling). I figure the latter is unlikely to require a
filesystem shrink ;-)

Ta,

Jim