Restating the case for keeping "User Data" on a physically separate drive or drives

[Jeffrey Watts]

How are "we" going to set that as a default practice?

As far as your idea goes, it's hardly new or novel.  It's also not
appropriate for the vast majority of people.  Why?  Because most people
_only have one hard drive_.  Laptops only have room for one hard drive, many
desktops only have room for one as well.  Many people can't afford the extra
expense or would prefer to spend their money on other things.

Also, using a second hard drive for user data storage is hardly a solution
for preventing data loss.  Everyone should be backing up their data to an
external device (preferably off-site) or removable media.  If you add a
second hard drive that's not going to help you if your computer shorts out
and fries the electronics.

Now, that all said, using a separate drive for the reasons you've stated is
certainly not a bad thing.  It can make installs and upgrades a bit easier,
and it does provide you a bit more extra safety should you have a root
volume failure (but obviously won't help you should your user volume fail).
What you've stated is very common practice on servers that provide user
services (or have application users).

But instead of spending energy promoting using a second hard drive, you
ought to be promoting backups.

Jeffrey.

On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Oren Beck <orenbeck at gmail.com> wrote:

> I have been gently suggesting a new practice.  Making it routine to keep
> the Non-OS data on a separate drive from the OS. Bluntly stating the two
> bedrock facts seems belaboring the obvious. But the percent of such default
> installs is trivial at best. So? I invite constructive comment on why or why
> NOT using a separate device for OS and user data makes any sense.
>
> The two bedrock facts being? 1: that any disaster befalling the OS device's
> file system has "less chance" of damaging user data. 2: Establishing that
> user data as detached from the OS assists many things. The list of those
> "many things" is non-trivial and more. Let me give the short closers
>
> *IF* we establish it as default practice that future Linux installs use a
> two device minimal mode we banish whole categories of data disasters. That
> alone is good enough for me. The icing on that being swapping an OS becomes
> closer to a trivial "no user data risked" operation.
>
> Addendum forced by premeditated desire to stifle the YahBut gallery is the
> cherry on top.
>
> In a long past time a "drive" was a truly major expense. Even removable
> media such as floppy etc were cost issues. Today ? I humbly offer the KCLUG
> thread on Craig's issues RE: Rolling back updates. as "Exhibit A"
>
> --
> Oren Beck
>
>

-- 

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from
oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that
will reach to himself." -- Thomas Paine
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kclug.org/pipermail/kclug/attachments/20090131/bfd01107/attachment.htm>