From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Jun 30 13:37:22 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id EB01B37B401; Mon, 30 Jun 2003 13:37:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.econolodgetulsa.com (mail.econolodgetulsa.com
	[198.78.66.163])	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 81AAF43FE1; Mon, 30 Jun 2003 13:37:22 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from user@mail.econolodgetulsa.com)
Received: from mail (mail [198.78.66.163])h5UKbMnW062461;
	Mon, 30 Jun 2003 13:37:22 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from user@mail.econolodgetulsa.com)
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 13:37:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Josh Brooks <user@mail.econolodgetulsa.com>
To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1030630142821.1379B-100000@fledge.watson.org>
Message-ID: <20030630131951.L57224-100000@mail.econolodgetulsa.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: per-directory quotas possible on 5.x ?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 20:37:23 -0000


Hi Robert,

On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Robert Watson wrote:

> As you may have noticed in trying the vn-backed mechanism, there are some
> inefficiencies that turn up in FreeBSD when have large numbers of
> pseudo-devices, etc.  The resizing problem is real, also, since we don't
> have online file system resizing.  FWIW, a file system like HFS+ (which
> has a much more strict directory hierarchy) would lend itself to directory
> quotas much more.  A port of HFS+ to FreeBSD was recently posted to
> freebsd-fs.

Thank you for your very informative response.  I am curious, what sort of
inefficiencies do turn up when you have large numebers of pseudo devices ?

Do you have any comments on a system running, say, 100 vn-backed mounted
filesystems ?  200 ?  (presume moderate to heavy activity in each ...)

thanks!