Re: Thoughts on Quotas
On 09/29/10 03:47 PM, Rumko wrote:
> Stathis Kamperis wrote:
>
>> 2010/9/28 Rumko<rumcic@gmail.com>:
>>> Stathis Kamperis wrote:
>>>
>>>> 2010/9/28 Sd瓣vtaker<sdavtaker@gmail.com>:
>>>>> What i tried to sai about history was that user usage should be
>>>>> measured in a different bag than the history that the user usage
>>>>> generated.
>>>>> Sorry if it was not clear, english is not my main language and i use
>>>>> to fail time to time. :-/
>>>>> Damian
>>>>>
>>>> I kind of agree.
>>>>
>>>> Why "punish" user for something that s/he is not able to control
>>>> directly ? Even more, the user may not be aware of the underlying
>>>> filesystem's technicalities (how it retains history and so on).
>>>>
>>>> Better come up with something else.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Stathis
>>> Not punishing that user means punishing the whole system and everything
>>> depending on that system. And as I said before, it's user's data, so who
>>> should be punished if not the user? The user can always tell the admin that
>>> he does not any history at all or how much history he needs, so it's purely
>>> that user's responsibility ... his data, his rules, his reponsibility.
>>> [...]
>> Ok, fine. I'm not strongly opinionated on this. I'm just thinking from
>> the Josephine perspective, who may not (or even want to) know how her
>> file-system operates.
> Then that user's home dir can be nohistory and there is no problem?
> If she doesn't need multiple copies of her data, then I see no reason why to
> keep that data. But if she wants n snapshots/backups then there should be a
> limit on how much total space she can take. Otherwise we could just display
> du -h of her home dir when she logs in and it would be about as useful at
> limiting her disk usage, so there would be no point to a quota ;)
> On purpose she could bring down the whole system at will even though she
> was "limited", but unfortunately she could do it unknowingly as well
> (downloading flash videos, powerpoint jokes, maybe a movie or two, etc. over
> and over and rewriting the old files).
>
>> But if we go this route, then we should also provide history retention
>> statistics to user-land utilities, such as df(1).
>>
>> Imagine the confusion of a user that types 'df', sees that the quota
>> threshold hasn't been reached, yet she is denied further disk storage
>> allocation.
> Agreed, now we just need to find someone to do it :P
While you're at it, why don't make two kinds of snapshots.
1. A user initiated snapshot, usnap, that the user controls and counts
towards the quota limit.
2. System snapshots, ssnap, obviously managed by the system/admin (out
of control of the user) and therefore counts as system overhead.
討論串 (同標題文章)
完整討論串 (本文為第 27 之 32 篇)：