Messages in this thread |  | | From | Toivo Pedaste <> | Subject | Re: RFC - tree quotas for Linux (2.4.12, ext2) | Date | Fri, 19 Oct 2001 11:00:09 +0800 |
| |
>On Thursday October 18, twalberg@mindspring.com wrote: >> A semi-random thought on the tree-quota concept: >> >> Does it really make sense to charge a tree quota to a single specific >> user? I haven't really looked into what would be required to implement >> it, but my mental picture of a tree quota is somewhat divorced from the >> user concept, other than maybe the quota table containing a pointer to >> a contact for quota violations. The bookkeeping might be easier if each >> tree quota root just held a cumulative total of allocated space, and >> maybe a just a user name for contacts (or on the fancier side, a hook >> to execute something...).
>However I actually want to charge usage to users. >There is a natural mapping from users to directory trees via the >concept of the home-directory. It is home directories that I want to >impose quotas on. So it seems natural to charge space usage to a >users.
The use I can see for tree quotas whould be quite divorced from accounts or users. Currently if you want limit the amount of space the say /tmp, /home or /var/mail uses you need to put it on a separate partition, but if you could put a quota on a tree you'd have a much more flexible systema adminstration tool to control the disk space used by each particular function.
I quite like the idea of the quota being related to an inode. -- Toivo Pedaste Email: toivo@ucs.uwa.edu.au University Communications Services, Phone: +61 8 9 380 2605 University of Western Australia Fax: +61 8 9 380 1109 "The time has come", the Walrus said, "to talk of many things"... - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |