Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 13:57:55 +1000 From: Andrew Reilly <andrew-freebsd@areilly.bpc-users.org> To: John Kozubik <john@kozubik.com> Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org, Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no>, Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: It's 2008. 1 TB disk drives cost $160. Quotas are 32-bit. Message-ID: <20080701035755.GA23685@duncan.reilly.home> In-Reply-To: <20080630085612.G1807@kozubik.com> References: <20080628132632.R1807@kozubik.com> <864p7bw387.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20080630073539.U1807@kozubik.com> <4868FB2F.7010204@FreeBSD.org> <20080630085612.G1807@kozubik.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 09:05:48AM -0700, John Kozubik wrote: > That point is well taken. However, regardless of the adoption rate, I > _do_ believe that there is still a qualitative difference between quotas > and, for instance, ZFS - in terms of "coreness". One qualitative difference is that lots of people seem to be interested in ZFS. I haven't seen any mention of quotas for many years. In fact, I was under a vague impression that they hadn't worked since UFS2, and that that was still the case because no-one cared. > I believe this because of the historical presence of this functionality > and the reasonable expectation that it represents a basic function of a > unix-based OS (not just FreeBSD). There are lots of historical functionalities that are no longer part of the OS. Things change. Now it may be that quotas are indeed useful enough to be salvaged in a geric fashion (applicable to arbitrary filesystems, as has been mentioned). Not my call: I'm certainly not going to do the work. But with the level of use in recent years, maybe the right answer is to consign them to the bin (or an optional GEOM layer or whatever), along with tty line disciplines, uucp, isdn and X10? Cheers, Andrew
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080701035755.GA23685>