Re: fs-independent quotas

[Ignatios Souvatzis <is%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 03:16:09PM +0000, David Holland wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 11:57:04AM +0200, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote:
>  > > support to other filesystems (tempfs, perhaps v7fs) or even add other
>  > > filesystems that have or may have their own native quota handling
>  > > (zfs, Hammer, you name it). 
>  > 
>  > zfs - does it really have quota? 
> 
> I don't know... but if not, there are plenty of other fses.
> 
>  > All the demos I've seen talk about sub-filesystem limits; you create
>  > per-user sub-filesystems if you want to emulate per-user quota.
>  > 
>  > (Correct me if I'm wrong.)
>  > 
>  > How would this fit in, if at all?
> 
> That's a good question. My first instinct is that like the other stuff
> zfs does that it does in its own semantically-incompatible way, it
> would require its own tools. But I guess the quota system could be
> made to report the limits if the sub-filesystems are specifically
> assigned to users somehow. Or something like that...

The problem is that sub-file-system per user, or one per workgroup and 
one subsubfs per user, are only special cases of what you can do. It's 
really a filesystem, mounted at some point in the tree, and can be used
to limit finer-grained than what you can express with user and group
quota, although it can emulate their functionality.

        -is