- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- Operating Systems
- >
- Operating System - HP-UX
- >
- Re: Preferred install - FS vs. Whole Disk
Categories
Company
Local Language
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Forums
Discussions
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Community
Resources
Forums
Blogs
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-05-2009 09:41 AM
тАО11-05-2009 09:41 AM
Preferred install - FS vs. Whole Disk
The issue centers around installing HP-UX and choosing separate filesystems for the generally known filesystems like opt, var, usr... Do you still prefer to have separate filesystems or have you moved to whole disk? Maybe a subset of whole disk where you separate /home & /tmp, but the rest is whole disk. Let me know what your preferences are & why you chose that as your preference.
I'm starting to lean towards a whole disk mentality like I do currently on linux, but our whole environment will be moving to 11.31 on Itanium and I feel the default sizes are way to low to be practical for long.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-05-2009 09:43 AM
тАО11-05-2009 09:43 AM
Re: Preferred install - FS vs. Whole Disk
Hope this helps!
Regards
Torsten.
__________________________________________________
There are only 10 types of people in the world -
those who understand binary, and those who don't.
__________________________________________________
No support by private messages. Please ask the forum!
If you feel this was helpful please click the KUDOS! thumb below!
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-05-2009 09:44 AM
тАО11-05-2009 09:44 AM
Re: Preferred install - FS vs. Whole Disk
Pete
Pete
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-05-2009 10:09 AM
тАО11-05-2009 10:09 AM
Re: Preferred install - FS vs. Whole Disk
I work with FS this is most flexible and simple, if you install OnlineJFS FS is very flexible to extend/reduce, except fs / & /stand
my english is poor, sorry :-)
Saludos
JEA
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-05-2009 11:36 AM
тАО11-05-2009 11:36 AM
Re: Preferred install - FS vs. Whole Disk
So I'm with Julian, i.e. I find that HP-UX's way is better, but it is manageable *ONLY* if you have Online JFS. If you don't have it, you'll be better off using whole disk!
Also you need to be careful when installing a vanilla system as I find the default values insufficient, and / cannot be resized easily after the fact (at least, it was the case a few years ago).
Good luck
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-05-2009 11:52 AM
тАО11-05-2009 11:52 AM
Re: Preferred install - FS vs. Whole Disk
> and I feel the default sizes are way to low to be practical for long.
When you cold-install (and that's the desirable way whenever you can), you can _choose_ your logical volume sizes. There is nothing to prevent you from accomodating your immediate and projected needs at that time.
As noted, you would be remiss if you didn't have OnlineJFS. In 11.31 it comes with any operating environment beyond the default/entry one. Aside from using OnlineJFS to resize filesystems you most certainly want it for its filesystem snapshot ability (for backups) and for its additional filesystem mount options with which you can optimize performance according to what the filesystem needs to do (permanently or temporarily).
While different than Linux environments, the idea of separate filesystems (logical volumes) for the standard Unix directories is to provide isolation and some protection from filling you whole disk when a rogue process or stupid mistake creates gigabytes of output.
Regards!
...JRF...
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-05-2009 07:57 PM
тАО11-05-2009 07:57 PM
Re: Preferred install - FS vs. Whole Disk
If you have a very small system, perhaps 2-4 GB of RAM and one or two internal disks, then you might experiment with a whole disk layout. I would be concerned about Ignite/UX (the only way to restore your system with a complete disk failure) and possibly other obscure side effects, especially with Itanium and 11.31.
If this is a test box, then go for it. Otherwise, I would not put a system like this into production. As mentioned, the separation of the various mountpoints is a method to protect production by isolating filesystems. A whole disk layout guarantees system failure when any rogue process creates a huge file or millions of small files.
Bill Hassell, sysadmin
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-06-2009 02:32 AM
тАО11-06-2009 02:32 AM
Re: Preferred install - FS vs. Whole Disk
For me this 'whole disk' naming is a little bit distracting. I use this wording usually for LVM ( ~ whole disk approach, where the whole disk will be pvcreated to be used for LVM). What you mentioned is rather a 'whole disk - single FS'
I am against this single FS approach, as it was mentioned the FS can be easily filled by some dumb processes, especially /var /var/tmp and /tmp. I prefer using some volume manager, be it LVM or VxVM.
Unix operates with beer.