Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!purdue!bu-cs!buengc!bph
From: bph@buengc.BU.EDU (Blair P. Houghton)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.ultrix
Subject: Re: Disk Partitioning, ULTRIX
Message-ID: <5001@buengc.BU.EDU>
Date: 28 Nov 89 20:05:40 GMT
References: <2615@canisius.UUCP>
Reply-To: bph@buengc.bu.edu (Blair P. Houghton)
Followup-To: comp.unix.ultrix
Organization: Boston Univ. Col. of Eng.
Lines: 26

In article <2615@canisius.UUCP> pavlov@canisius.UUCP (Greg Pavlov) writes:
>
>  The disktab file on a DECStation 3100 here includes the following in a
>  comment at the top of the file:

[...default partitioning strategy deleted...]

> Ok, we pay attention to the "rule" for the 'c' partition.  But none of the
> rest make any sense to us, at least most of the time.  Where does these algo-
> rithms come from ?  What is in ULTRIX that penalizes ignoring them ?

Sounds like some development-policy rule-of-thumb, kindof like the
9-to-1 resistance ratio for biasing a class-A common-emitter bipolar
transistor amplifier stage.  It seems that, since the size of the 'a',
(root) partition is roughly proportional to the size of the system,
then the size of the 'b' (default swapping) partition would also be
roughly proportional to the size of the 'a' partition.

Certainly nothing prevents your changing them to get improved
performance in a manner that improves the fulfillment of your
particular needs.

				--Blair
				  "I use the f partition to
				   even out the short leg on
				   my desk, myself..."