Bug 862189 - automatic partitioning / size
automatic partitioning / size
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: anaconda (Show other bugs)
18
Unspecified Unspecified
unspecified Severity unspecified
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Anaconda Maintenance Team
Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
:
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2012-10-02 04:51 EDT by Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
Modified: 2012-10-30 15:31 EDT (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-10-30 11:18:58 EDT
Type: Bug
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Jóhann B. Guðmundsson 2012-10-02 04:51:20 EDT
Description of problem:

I have a relative small-ish ( ssd ) disk and I just notice that we seem to be overestimating the required disk size for /. Surely a fixed size of 20G should suffice for / on a normal desktop install and or some kind of questimation based on package selection instead of putting roughly 40% of total disk space under it?

[root@localhost ~]# df -h
Filesystem      Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
rootfs           50G  6.4G   41G  14% /
/dev/root        50G  6.4G   41G  14% /
devtmpfs        872M     0  872M   0% /dev
tmpfs           874M  192K  874M   1% /dev/shm
tmpfs           874M  2.0M  872M   1% /run
tmpfs           874M     0  874M   0% /sys/fs/cgroup
tmpfs           874M  104K  874M   1% /tmp
/dev/sda5        65G  2.0G   60G   4% /home



Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

Whatever was on alpha

How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1. Just select the default disk layout
2.
3.
  
Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:
Comment 1 Chris Lumens 2012-10-30 11:18:58 EDT
The automatic partitioning sizes are based upon (relatively naive, I admit) needing enough space to do a full installation, plus some extra space for upgrades/building or installing other stuff/etc.  While we can revisit that exact number, I don't really see that we could design a useful q&a approach that wouldn't just confuse users more, and partitioning is already plenty confusing as it is.

For SSDs, I think we have enough other problems where the best approach would be a whole custom install class with its own default partitioning scheme.
Comment 2 Jóhann B. Guðmundsson 2012-10-30 12:57:36 EDT
(In reply to comment #1)
> The automatic partitioning sizes are based upon (relatively naive, I admit)
> needing enough space to do a full installation, plus some extra space for
> upgrades/building or installing other stuff/etc.  While we can revisit that
> exact number, I don't really see that we could design a useful q&a approach
> that wouldn't just confuse users more, and partitioning is already plenty
> confusing as it is.

Arguably an 20G on full blown desktop install should suffice but it's better to have to much then to little.

> 
> For SSDs, I think we have enough other problems where the best approach
> would be a whole custom install class with its own default partitioning
> scheme.

Hmm could you be more specific on what this issues are or better yet perhaps create a wiki page under Anaconda name space pointing out those issues so those of us that have ssd's can do as optimal install and partitioning scheme as possible?
Comment 3 David Lehman 2012-10-30 15:31:17 EDT
If you want optimal partitioning, do not choose automatic partitioning without going into custom and checking/tweaking it to meet your needs/wants.

Automatic partitioning is not required to produce the optimal result in all scenarios, dependent on each user's personal definition of optimal.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.