UFS install freebsd on a single / ufs partition

Hello world!
I would like to install freebsd on a single / ufs partition without dedicated /var and /usr partitions on a small server.
any contraindications? for security reason for example
Thank you very much
 
I would like to install freebsd on a single / ufs partition without dedicated /var and /usr partitions on a small server.
any contraindications? for security reason for example

The only valid reason I can think these days is that partition based backups are smaller and faster done etc. For example on this FreeBSD 12.0 laptop I set up couple of days ago, I made the other hd one big UFS mounted on / and the other disk is small FreeBSD swap partiotion + the rest mounted on /usr/home.

I've been running single partition installations for a while now and I'd say they are these days less hassle with space considerations etc.

-Reko
 
Multiple file systems (multiple partitions) have advantages. To me the biggest one is: If some idiot (that would be the sys admin, typically me myself) fills up one file system (like /var or /tmp), then the rest of the system is still working, and you have a much better chance of recovering without drastic measures (like boot from rescue disk, run single user, all those unpleasant and dangerous things). But those are minor considerations. The disadvantage of multiple file systems is that traditionally, they require multiple partitions, which wastes disk space on rounding errors (you never know how big to make them).

Here's a proposal: Why don't you try ZFS on a single partition. That allows you to take that single partition and split it into many pseudo file systems, which gives you flexibility, and the ability to do fine-grained space management. Judging by discussions here, that may be the default setup when using root-on-ZFS in the installer. I don't actually know the details of that default install: While I am a very strong proponent of using ZFS, and have multiple ZFS file systems on my home server, I have not installed root on ZFS (yet).
 
Multiple file systems (multiple partitions) have advantages. To me the biggest one is: If some idiot (that would be the sys admin, typically me myself) fills up one file system (like /var or /tmp), then the rest of the system is still working, and you have a much better chance of recovering without drastic measures (like boot from rescue disk, run single user, all those unpleasant and dangerous things). But those are minor considerations. The disadvantage of multiple file systems is that traditionally, they require multiple partitions, which wastes disk space on rounding errors (you never know how big to make them).

Here's a proposal: Why don't you try ZFS on a single partition. That allows you to take that single partition and split it into many pseudo file systems, which gives you flexibility, and the ability to do fine-grained space management. Judging by discussions here, that may be the default setup when using root-on-ZFS in the installer. I don't actually know the details of that default install: While I am a very strong proponent of using ZFS, and have multiple ZFS file systems on my home server, I have not installed root on ZFS (yet).
I love ZFS! I use on my desktop and everywhere I can. Wish I could use ZFS but server installation wizard only allows UFS and I cannot use KVM over IP.
 
Back
Top