We all know that filesystems get fragmented with use, and that smaller filesystems are quicker to access. So it makes sense to have separate partitions for /, where your system files are, and /home, where your data is. Fine. There may be advantages to more elaborate partition layouts, e.g. - Using secure mount options for world-writable areas may help avoid certain exploits (though this is probably more applicable on multiuser systems than desktops) - Prevention of various failures due to logs or temp files getting too big - Further prevention of fragmentation, if using a separate /var partition However, I'm wondering if the performance impact is largely beneficial or detrimental, regardless of fragmentation issues. My reasoning here is that modern Linux filesystems are mostly journaled, which means metadata is written to the disk twice. And more partitions with journaled filesystems = more journals, which (I expect) should mean the drive heads moving around more during writes. Which should mean delays, right? But I'm not sure how this balances with the shorter access times for smaller filesystems... I lack the inclination to benchmark this stuff on my desktop, so I figured I might as well ask here: what impact do different partitioning layouts have on Linux performance, on a machine with a typical SATA HDD? How about for random vs. sequential loads? Read vs. write performance?