[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: RFC - tree quotas for Linux (2.4.12, ext2)

>On Thursday October 18, 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

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:
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
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:08    [W:0.024 / U:0.052 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site