LinuxQuestions.org
Latest LQ Deal: Complete CCNA, CCNP & Red Hat Certification Training Bundle
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Newbie
User Name
Password
Linux - Newbie This Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question? If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 06-24-2009, 01:32 PM   #1
Ook
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Location: Hell, Arizona
Distribution: Slackware 14.1
Posts: 463

Rep: Reputation: 60
One partition or many for 1TB disk?


I'm installing a 1TB disk into a Slackware 12.2 system. Is there any reason not to format the entire disk with just one huge partition? Would I realize any significant performance or efficiency improvements if I created several smaller partitions on the disk? I'm using it for backup storage only - I back up OS and critical files, web server, etc. from all of my other computers. It's running with an old Sempron 2200 on a socket A motherboard, 768M memory
 
Old 06-24-2009, 01:55 PM   #2
pljvaldez
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: Somewhere on the String
Distribution: Debian Wheezy (x86)
Posts: 6,094

Rep: Reputation: 271Reputation: 271Reputation: 271
Typically I would create a 3 partitions: / for the install (as minimal as possible to do whatever job like backup), /swap, and then /data for the actual backup data. On a machine I use for backup, I have like 4GB for a minimal Debian (overkill since it only takes up 1GB of space), 1GB swap, and the rest a large partition for data.

Or better yet, if you have an old drive, use that for / and /swap and then just use the terabyte drive for /data. And depending on what types of files you are backing up, you may want to use a different filesystem for the /data partition. I have a bunch of movies and whatnot stored so I use xfs which handles large file sizes better than ext3.
 
Old 06-24-2009, 02:35 PM   #3
Ook
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Location: Hell, Arizona
Distribution: Slackware 14.1
Posts: 463

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 60
I have an old 30GB WD drive I use for boot and swap. The TB drive is data only. Most of the stuff going on it is small files, so I left it as ext2. IIRC the size limit for ext2 is 4TB? With TB drives being somewhat new, I wasn't sure how well ext2 would work with these drives, regardless of max size limits.
 
Old 06-24-2009, 02:52 PM   #4
Animal X
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jun 2009
Location: SW VA
Distribution: Ubuntu, Mepis, Fedora, Clonezilla, GPartEd
Posts: 11
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 1
i wouldnt partition it, if just for data, unless you might consider having an alternate file system for compatibility issues. I got 1TB WD external, it's great.
 
Old 06-24-2009, 02:54 PM   #5
pljvaldez
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: Somewhere on the String
Distribution: Debian Wheezy (x86)
Posts: 6,094

Rep: Reputation: 271Reputation: 271Reputation: 271
I think it should work fine, though I'm sure others would be better "tuned" for this application (i.e. lots of smaller files), but ext2/3 are really solid.

BTW, any particular reason for not using ext3? In my (somewhat limited experience), it tends to recover more gracefully from things like power outages...
 
Old 06-24-2009, 03:02 PM   #6
ilikejam
Senior Member
 
Registered: Aug 2003
Location: Glasgow
Distribution: Fedora / Solaris
Posts: 3,109

Rep: Reputation: 96
One-big-partition is fine. I would use ext3/4, though - you don't want to be doing an fsck on a 1TB drive if anything goes the way of the pear, and journalling should eliminate the need for that.

On a more fundamental note, a wise man once said to me: "If it's spinning, it's not a backup". Words to live by.

Dave
 
Old 06-24-2009, 03:40 PM   #7
Ook
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Location: Hell, Arizona
Distribution: Slackware 14.1
Posts: 463

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by pljvaldez View Post
I think it should work fine, though I'm sure others would be better "tuned" for this application (i.e. lots of smaller files), but ext2/3 are really solid.

BTW, any particular reason for not using ext3? In my (somewhat limited experience), it tends to recover more gracefully from things like power outages...
I've noticed that sometimes when things go wrong with ext2, the default fsck parms won't fix it, and the box goes into a reboot-fsck-ohcrap_its_broken-reboot cycle until I intervene. Any feelings about using ext4?
 
Old 06-24-2009, 03:42 PM   #8
Ook
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Location: Hell, Arizona
Distribution: Slackware 14.1
Posts: 463

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilikejam View Post
...On a more fundamental note, a wise man once said to me: "If it's spinning, it's not a backup". Words to live by.Dave
Yah - there is always the risk of it going kablooie, but the probability of it doing so just when I need the data is so minimal, I can live with the risk.
 
Old 06-24-2009, 09:05 PM   #9
chrism01
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Aug 2004
Location: Sydney
Distribution: Centos 6.8, Centos 5.10
Posts: 17,240

Rep: Reputation: 2324Reputation: 2324Reputation: 2324Reputation: 2324Reputation: 2324Reputation: 2324Reputation: 2324Reputation: 2324Reputation: 2324Reputation: 2324Reputation: 2324
I'd go with ext3 for now. ext2 doesn't have journalling, ext3 does. ext4 is still very new. Wait until its the default fs type on a long term OS eg RHEL/Centos.
Always be conservative with backups. And yeah, make a non-spinning backup, pref offsite eg DVD.
 
Old 06-24-2009, 09:45 PM   #10
Quakeboy02
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2006
Distribution: Debian Squeeze 2.6.32.9 SMP AMD64
Posts: 3,275

Rep: Reputation: 126Reputation: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by pljvaldez View Post
BTW, any particular reason for not using ext3? In my (somewhat limited experience), it tends to recover more gracefully from things like power outages...
I've got my /data on a 320GB ext3 drive. The data is mostly static - dvds etc. Every 30 boots or so it does an automatic fsck and it takes forever! Sure, I could skip the autofsck, boot, and do it manually, but it's still going to take many minutes to make that drive available. If you don't mind the wait, use an ext3. If you don't want to have the occasional boot take 20 minutes (WAG for 1TB) then use xfs. JMO
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Strange Behavior 1TB Hard Disk Drive Igby Linux - Server 4 05-28-2009 01:31 PM
Big (1TB) External drive + missing partition table = ? Daws General 3 03-14-2007 11:13 AM
Partition scheme ideas for 1TB workstation spacemanspiff Linux - Hardware 2 06-04-2006 04:12 AM
Copy files from partition to partition too slow, SATA hard disk.What should I do£¿ Ryanlee SUSE / openSUSE 20 10-31-2005 08:30 AM
Reclaim disk partition from hard disk installation EStester Linux - Enterprise 2 03-09-2005 12:46 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:24 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration