Re: new servers

[Christer Edwards <christer edwards gmail com>]

n Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Jeff Schroeder
<jeffschroeder computer org> wrote:
> Hmmmmm why not try to fit with the existing (and unofficial) naming
> spec. I'm in favor of functional names (webapps, master, etc) or
> sticking to the existing standards. Most (if not all) of the existing
> stuff is made up of gtk widgets or function.

Just names that I came up with. If you'll recall, you had to tell me
the reasoning behind 'combobox'. As far as I knew there wasn't any
rhyme or reason to the names, so I just picked two. They can be
changed of course, that's just what they are now..

>> 2x250G 7.2k - Hardware RAID 1
>>
>> partitioning:
>> /boot : 500M
>> lv_root  : 20G
>
> Is it safe to assume this is / ?

Correct. / is a logical volume at 20G.

>> lv_home : 20G
>
> /home will be on nfs so why allocate so much? Isn't this the server
> that will do primary for ldap, dns, mail? It seems like /var would be
> pretty important here instead of /home as all three of those services
> keep data primarily under /var.

I'll shrink these. I had forgotten that /home is an nfs mount, so this
definitely can be much smaller. Any suggested sizes? Just a few gig?
Let me know and I'll shrink these before I forget.

> What about clutter? It has a lot of disks and will have lots of
> different stuff on it. Not super opinionated on this, but it seems to
> fit in with the existing stuff mostly.

Again, names can easily be changed. We can even change them after
they're in Phoenix so probably not too much to worry about right now.

> Good stuff! What filesystem are you using? ext3 or ext4?

These are all ext4.