Messages in this thread |  | | From | Robert Glamm <> | Subject | Re: 2.2.0 wishlist | Date | Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:11:33 -0500 (CDT) |
| |
> > Doh, someone tell me to RTFM... ;) > > > > I still don't think that it should ever be implemented. If you've got > > home dirs on an almost-full disk (i.e., like 99%), you could conceivably > > be ``wasting'' maybe 5, 10, even 20% on undeleted files, and the full disk > > would become a needless annoyance (IMHO :). Does someone > > have stats on how often & what size files are deleted/created/modeified > > in a home directory structure? Almost sounds like a computer science > > master's thesis topic to me.. ;) > > Well just to tell you to RTFM, it's in the file system, but it's not > honored (hmm, I really don't like this spelling, but it's in my > /usr/dict/words so ....) by the kernel (ie the kernel currently ignores > these bits). > > Anyway, root still has 5% of the disk for cleaning up after the users > (well assuming you didn't kill that off ;).
Oh, heh, that's one of the features I actually liked from Sun's filesystem that was never implemented on the SGI systems I adminned. I've still got that.
> If the undelete stuff was fixed, I'd want to have a cron job that scaned > the undeleteable deleted files, and really got rid of them after a set > time (depending on your avalable disk space anything from 1 hour to weeks). > > Also you'd have to make it a real pain for users to undelete stuff if the > files arn't part of there quota (ie just keep the file's deletion date > under 5 days, and it's never purged, instant free disk space).
Well, is it really necessary to set the timeout at longer than a day on deleted files? From when I've wanted to recover files it's usually ''oh, crap, I just typed rm -rf on the wrong directory DOH!" and frantically hit the break key to stop it before it purges everything; usually my recovery time would be less than 15 minutes. I can see if you wrote a cron job that ran at night you might want up to a day to undelete files, but I can't imagine a case for a longer recovery period. Of course, I haven't thought about this too hard either :)
> You could make sure it's part of there quota, and it's not a problem, > except when you have users mailing that they can't save even though > they've got no files in there home directory (though you could allow them > access to the purge command in the same way is passwd works (ie 'passwd' is > me, 'passwd user' is user, and only root can specify a user name).
Hmm... that's an interesting idea. A quota with soft, hard limits, along with an 'undelete' space limit? That would make the undelete feature easier to accept, I think. That way the people that didn't want that feature could set the 'undelete' space limit to 0.
-- Bob Glamm | "You can't do a `goto' to a block Email: glamm@mountains.ee.umn.edu | that has been optimized away. URL: http://www.cs.umn.edu/~glamm | Darn." Home: (612)623-9437 Work: (612)625-7876 | - from the perltrap(1) manpage
|  |