Find the answer to your Linux question:
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13
Hello Friends ! just wanted to know... my ubuntu partition is 8gb swap and 75gb / ext3. I have 100gb of unallocated space & How to merge / ext3 75gb ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #1
    Just Joined! zeneknath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    42

    Post Extending Partition


    Hello Friends !

    just wanted to know...

    my ubuntu partition is 8gb swap and 75gb / ext3. I have 100gb of unallocated space

    & How to merge / ext3 75gb to unallocated space to make it 175gb of ext3 / partition?

    Thanks in advance !

  2. #2
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    12
    I would download a GParted LiveCD and use that to resize you partitions. You'll probably need to first move your swap partition all the way to the end (right) of the drive, and then resize your root partition to fill the remaining space between the two. Backup anything important on this drive beforehand, although in my experience this process is quite reliable your are putting your data at a fair bit of risk by moving this much of it around the drive at once. Good luck

    Dustin

  3. #3
    Linux Guru Jonathan183's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    3,049
    Quote Originally Posted by zeneknath View Post
    my ubuntu partition is 8gb swap and 75gb / ext3. I have 100gb of unallocated space

    & How to merge / ext3 75gb to unallocated space to make it 175gb of ext3 / partition
    Use the Ubuntu live CD - partitioning tool to resize/create/delete partitions as you want. I think you are better off making root about 30GB and creating a /home or data partition rather than just resizing the root partition to use the whole hard drive. If you want more specific advice then you should post the output of
    Code:
    mount
    sudo fdisk -l

  4. $spacer_open
    $spacer_close
  5. #4
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    12
    Curious as to why you'd suggest a seperate /home partition on the same physical drive? Having multiple partitions on the same drive means seeking constantly across the drive to be able to service requests for both partitions, and this will have a true impact on performance. Loading any application means loading binaries and libraries from / and at about the same time loading configuration info from /home, and as loading an application is the most IO intense operation a single user system generally performs what you suggest will cripple things considerably.

    Dustin

  6. #5
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Fairfax, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    94
    Dustin,
    The reason its preferable to have /home in a separate partition from / is because reinstalling or repairing the operating system is easier. To be honest, I never heard the argument of increased seek times and it would be interesting to quantify it.

  7. #6
    Linux User TaZMAniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    269
    And how is that any different then Windows that loads everything on one partition and then proceeds to fragment the heck out of all the files on the hard drive?


    At least when Linux needs to access the home folder for a config file it is only 1k to maybe a few hundred k's in size. And that file isn't spread across 20 sectors because fragmentation is minimal due to the format structure.

    Another reason Linux users put their home folder on a separate partition is that if we need to reload or decide to do a fresh install of a new version all we need to do is load the OS to root and create the swap drive then point it to our existing home partition.
    Everything is already in place and doesn't need to be reloaded or moved back from a backup drive.

    I have yet to see any degradation in file access or in my hard drive hosting both my OS and home partition and that drive has a total of 2.4 years of power on time.
    And I don't keep my pc running or hibernate. It's turned on and off at least 4 times or more a day.

  8. #7
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    12
    I'm not meaning degradation over time as in fragmentation, I mean access time because the head has to move a substantial distance across the platter from one partition to another. It's not really something you'd need to quantify, it's definetly going to be there. To what extent it would affect things I don't know, but it will make a difference. As to keeping my user info that's stored in /home during reinstall I've always just made a .tar beforehand and copied it back over post install but I guess that is one reason to keep it on a partition. I've used seperate /home partitions before but always on a seperate physical drive. Then again, with the amount of RAM most of us are using these days, binaries are generally only accessed from disc once after reboot, then buffered in RAM for the rest of your session. Maybe it's just not that big of a deal anymore.

    Dustin

  9. #8
    Linux Newbie
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    146
    Why do you need more than 10 GB ubuntu partition and more than 1 GB swap?

  10. #9
    Linux User
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Tokyo, Japan
    Posts
    260
    Putting everything on one partition is a bad idea. It could very well cause huge lag-times. And as BrianMicek mentioned, your home partition will not be safe if you need to do a clean system install.

    Using one partition does not guarantee that the executable binaries will be anywhere near the config files in your home directory. For example, executing bash will usually require loading the binary from some very low inner-cylinder, and then the system may have to load "~/.bashrc" from a very high outer-most cylinder -- the chances of this happening are high no matter what your partitioning scheme is.

    Using multiple partitions for /boot, /, /home and swap forces the system to very roughly order your files by type (e.g. binary files in / versus MP3s /home). Further, hard disks sort incoming seek requests to minimize the back-and-fourth of the arm. Since swap is accessed most often, it should go in the middle, where the arm will be the shortest distance from both the start and end cylinders, and also to make the arm pass the middle twice as often on round trips to the first and last cylinders.

    If you know that the system will be accessing back and forth between /usr/bin and /home/user quite often, but it is impossible to make the two partitions close together due to the size of /home, it is best to split them up on either side of the swap partition. This gives the arm (which should be in the middle most often due to swap bing there) less of a distance to travel to either side of the platter.

    I go so far as to have a separate /usr/share partition, because Gnome and KDE, and other applications like "man", "vim", and "emacs" store so many files there that it is accessed almost as often as /, but the files tend to be smaller and more numerous text and icon files, so you can optimize that partition to accommodate smaller, more numerous files more efficiently.

    But in a few years, everyone will be using SSD's, so this knowledge will become obsolete.

  11. #10
    Linux Newbie
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    146
    SSDs are going nowhere, within a few years platter densities will increase exponentially, and so will the leaner read and write speeds will skyrocket SSDs. Speaking of which SSDs are still lagging way behind in terms of write speed.

    SSDs will always have the inherited drawback of lower lifespan.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •