You are not logged in.

#1 2005-05-03 03:07:51

elasticdog
Member
From: Washington, USA
Registered: 2005-05-02
Posts: 995
Website

Partition Size Comparison of /usr Versus /opt?

I'm a fairly new user of linux, and have been on Ubuntu for awhile now.  I've lately found it limiting for what I want to do, and like what I've read about Arch. I would like to do a clean install on a machine that has a 80 GB hard drive, and am trying to figure out partitions.

I've heard that Arch likes to install many programs (as it should) in the /opt directory, and others default to the more commonplace /usr.  I'm wondering what amount of space I should allocate to each of thier individual partitions.  As of now, I planned on doing something like this:

disc1    ext2       128 MB    /boot
disc5    ReiserFS   384 MB    /
disc6    swap       1536 MB
disc7    ReiserFS   8192 MB   /usr
disc8    ReiserFS   8192 MB   /opt
disc9    ReiserFS   4096 MB   /var
disc10   ReiserFS   ...       /home

I was wondering if anyone knew the approximate proportion of progams installed in /usr versus those installed in /opt, and what size they typically should be?  (I do realize I'm giving each section some overhead, but I'd rather be safe than sorry)  Thanks in advance...

Offline

#2 2005-05-03 03:26:49

phrakture
Arch Overlord
From: behind you
Registered: 2003-10-29
Posts: 7,879
Website

Re: Partition Size Comparison of /usr Versus /opt?

well.... personally I wouldn't separate them, as the partitions should really be logically seperate (/home makes sense as it carries settings over from install to install, /var can change rapidly, /boot runs the machine).  However, I think some people do use seperate partitions for /usr and /opt.

The larger, comprehensive packages are installed to /opt - kde, gnome, xfce, mozilla, firefox, and some others - this probably won't get *that* far beyond that... I'd say at the very maximum ever it'd be around 4-5 GB.
As for your partition layout, it has some issues.  your /home partition probably won't get that big - it's usually filled with config files, and possibly music files (I keep my music in a seperate partition, which is like 80% full ATM).  More important is your "/" and "/usr" partitions - these should take up a majority of your drive....

my partitions look like this:

hda1 : /home/music 15GB
hda2 : /boot 50MB
hda3 : swap 1GB
hda4 : /home 4GB
hda4 : / ~40GB

that way there's no need to worry about what size /usr and /opt should be. 

I'd suggest maxing out the "/" partition, as then you won't need to worry about space for /usr and things like that

Offline

#3 2005-05-03 04:01:27

elasticdog
Member
From: Washington, USA
Registered: 2005-05-02
Posts: 995
Website

Re: Partition Size Comparison of /usr Versus /opt?

That does make a lot more sense...after searching the web for partitioning advice today, I've become more and more confused.  Much of the information out there is very old and I've always relied on automatic configurations before.  The scheme I originally posted is loosely based on what Ubuntu had setup by default (minus a /tmp partition and plus the /opt one).  Seems like everybody has thier own opinion on how to do it best.

Anyway, this is what I'll be looking at then?

disc1    ext2        128 MB   /boot
disc5    swap       1536 MB
disc6    ReiserFS   4096 MB   /var
disc7    ReiserFS     40 GB   /home
disc8    ReiserFS    ~34 GB   /

Offline

#4 2005-05-03 04:23:41

phrakture
Arch Overlord
From: behind you
Registered: 2003-10-29
Posts: 7,879
Website

Re: Partition Size Comparison of /usr Versus /opt?

That works alot better... some suggestions... you'll never use 128MB for your boot partition unless you keep every kernel version for the past few years... with just one kernel and all the boot configs, I'm using 4MB - and that's with the vanilla arch kernel... I can scrap that down even farther if I cared (vanilla works fine for me)

Also, 40GB may be a fairly large home partition, unless you're planning on putting media there... that's really up to you... personally, I download so much anime I wish I had setup a larger home partition, but I'm too lazy to move it all around... I 've been samba-ing it across my network to another machine I use as a HDD graveyard (I have 4 drives in it totalling 200GB)...

Also, a seperate /var partition is a good idea... alot of people do that.

And about /tmp - don't worry about it - the standard arch install uses tmpfs for /tmp (meaning it's done in ram and not on disk... makes sense that way as it's temporary)

Offline

#5 2005-05-03 06:23:59

elasticdog
Member
From: Washington, USA
Registered: 2005-05-02
Posts: 995
Website

Re: Partition Size Comparison of /usr Versus /opt?

Awesome...thanks for the great advice!  I wasn't sure on the /boot size...most places said that 100 MB would be more than enough, but didn't elaborate further.  I do plan on putting a decent amount of media under /home, thus the large size.  Looks like this is what I'll be going with:

disc1    ext2         64 MB   /boot
disc5    swap       1536 MB
disc6    ReiserFS   4096 MB   /var
disc7    ReiserFS     40 GB   /home
disc8    ReiserFS    ~34 GB   /

Offline

#6 2005-05-03 07:51:56

cmp
Member
Registered: 2005-01-03
Posts: 350

Re: Partition Size Comparison of /usr Versus /opt?

i would not make / that big, I have 8gb for everything except /home and it works flawlessly.
I think you won't put that much data in / and programms and config files a rather small compared to movies or music.

Filesystem            Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/ide/host0/bus0/target1/lun0/part1
                      3.8G  2.8G  874M  77% /
none                  126M     0  126M   0% /dev/shm
tmpfs                 126M   12K  126M   1% /tmp
/dev/ide/host0/bus0/target1/lun0/part5
                       70G   61G  9.2G  87% /home

I only whished I had seperated /var and /boot from the rest, but that shouldn't be a problem, as I have 70gb left unpartitioned wink.

btw.: how do I setup lilo with an extra /boot partition?

Offline

#7 2005-05-03 08:47:21

rose
Member
Registered: 2005-02-09
Posts: 64

Re: Partition Size Comparison of /usr Versus /opt?

If this is going to be a desktop system, I would consider not splitting drive at all. For years I have been using my system this way and didn't have to cope with any issues. I only kept a small partition <=8GB for Windows (when there was no QEmu...) and other small one <= 4GB for trying out new distros.

Don't you think that insisting on a lot of partitions isn't the same kind of thing like setting a lot of fancy optimization flags of the compiler by Gentoo users? It doesn't really help that much and you loose some flexibility and time.

Offline

#8 2005-05-03 09:22:28

iBertus
Member
From: Greenville, NC
Registered: 2004-11-04
Posts: 2,228

Re: Partition Size Comparison of /usr Versus /opt?

Mine looks like this. I've had this system up and running trouble free for a while now.

Filesystem    Type    Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/hda3  reiser4     52G  6.7G   45G  13% /
none         tmpfs    251M     0  251M   0% /dev/shm
tmpfs        tmpfs    251M   56K  251M   1% /tmp
/dev/hda4  reiser4     18G  422M   18G   3% /home
/dev/hda1     ext2    137M  3.9M  126M   3% /boot

Offline

#9 2005-05-03 09:36:02

shadowhand
Member
From: MN, USA
Registered: 2004-02-19
Posts: 1,142
Website

Re: Partition Size Comparison of /usr Versus /opt?

I use a 100Mb partition for /boot (reiserfs), a partition for / (reiser4) and a partition for /home (reiser4). Works great for me. If I split it down more, I think I would put /var on a new partition, but I don't think I would ever split /opt and /usr.


·¬»· i am shadowhand, powered by webfaction

Offline

#10 2005-05-03 13:19:05

cmp
Member
Registered: 2005-01-03
Posts: 350

Re: Partition Size Comparison of /usr Versus /opt?

@rose there are good points to split partitons:
var changes often, so it fragmentates. if it is on a new partition you ain't have to worry about this.
boot should be on an extra partition, if you wan't to use an exotic filesystem for / or you want to use your kernel on many distros.
/home should be for the same reason a different partition.

Offline

#11 2005-05-03 13:30:05

CyberTron
Member
From: Gotland ,Sweden
Registered: 2005-03-17
Posts: 645
Website

Re: Partition Size Comparison of /usr Versus /opt?

I do however agree with rose a little...

but not entirely..
my partition scheme for my 80 gb harddrive is for the moment:

/  20gb
/movies 50gb
/extra   10gb

where extra is my sparetire big_smile which I use to have my vmware files on, qemu, livecd experiments and sometimes...even winows goes there..

But, I am thinkin on doing the /home as a partition   but why /var? i mean, it changes, it fragmentates so does many other libraries...please explain? btw, isn't reiser supposed not to be fragmentable?  *curious*


http://www.linuxportalen.com  -> Linux Help portal for Linux and ArchLinux (in swedish)

Dell Inspiron 8500
Kernel 2.6.14-archck1  (selfcompiled)
Enlightenment 17

Offline

#12 2005-05-03 15:48:09

IceRAM
Member
From: Bucharest, Romania
Registered: 2004-03-04
Posts: 772
Website

Re: Partition Size Comparison of /usr Versus /opt?

CyberTron wrote:

But, I am thinkin on doing the /home as a partition   but why /var? i mean, it changes, it fragmentates so does many other libraries...please explain? btw, isn't reiser supposed not to be fragmentable?  *curious*

http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?t=11840
http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?t=11954

Now I'm also thinking of making a separate /var partition... Well.. maybe in the summer holiday.
OR...
Link /var to /home/var-arch (if I would share /home across multiple Linux installations).

Offline

#13 2005-05-03 16:03:00

CyberTron
Member
From: Gotland ,Sweden
Registered: 2005-03-17
Posts: 645
Website

Re: Partition Size Comparison of /usr Versus /opt?

very intressting....time to do something in the summer and make a partition for /var to big_smile

thanks for the links big_smile


http://www.linuxportalen.com  -> Linux Help portal for Linux and ArchLinux (in swedish)

Dell Inspiron 8500
Kernel 2.6.14-archck1  (selfcompiled)
Enlightenment 17

Offline

#14 2005-05-03 16:52:42

Snowman
Developer/Forum Fellow
From: Montreal, Canada
Registered: 2004-08-20
Posts: 5,212

Re: Partition Size Comparison of /usr Versus /opt?

CyberTron wrote:

But, I am thinkin on doing the /home as a partition   but why /var? i mean, it changes, it fragmentates so does many other libraries...please explain? btw, isn't reiser supposed not to be fragmentable?  *curious*

  Another reason some people use a different partition for var is that it receives the incoming emails.  If you have a mail server, and you are affected by a virus which spreads by email, only the /var partition will be filled up. It will affect the mail server and other programs using /var (of course) but it won't fill up the HD completely so you'll be able to save your work and you'll still be able to continue using the machine.

Offline

#15 2005-05-03 17:41:32

cmp
Member
Registered: 2005-01-03
Posts: 350

Re: Partition Size Comparison of /usr Versus /opt?

I think there are also other situation, which have the same mechanism. like log files filling up var completly.

Offline

#16 2005-05-03 20:32:31

stavrosg
Member
From: Rhodes, Greece
Registered: 2005-05-01
Posts: 330
Website

Re: Partition Size Comparison of /usr Versus /opt?

indeed, cmp.
I accidentially deleted the log rotation cronjobs once, and found out about it when I found (by chance, again) that my /var/log/syslog reached a size of 400 MB ( lol ).
I ALWAYS put /var on a seperate partition after that. wink

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB