Hi Kirill, On 06/02/2012 11:21 PM, Kirill Korotaev wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Not having looked closely at the original patchset, let me ask - is this >>>>> feature going to be a freebie with Eric's usernamespace patches? >>>> >>>> It we can reach a consensus to bind quota on mount namespace for >>>> container or other things maybe. >>> >>> 1. OpenVZ doesn't use mount namespaces and still has quotas per container. >> >> AFAICS, OpenVZ has self-released quota tools to supply this feature. > > but standard quota tools work inside container w/o any modifications. > This is very important for us, cause we run unmodified distros inside. Yes, am agree. I can work out a new patches regarding quota tools based on mount namespace w/o any modification. > > Actually, this is unrelated. I meant that OpenVZ needs ability to have group quotas w/o mount namespaces. > >> >>> >>> 2. BTW, have you seen Dmitry Monakhov patches for same containers quotas via additional inode attribute? it allows to make it journaled. >> >> You means the directly/project quota on ext4? >> If yes, I have observed this feature back to the end of last year in >> EXT4 mail list. > > yes > >> >>> How quotas are stored in your case? >> >> It simply cached at memory for now, it also can be tweak up to journaled >> I think, if introducing corresponding routines quota_read/quota_write to >> particular journal file system. > > just cached quotas are bad - you never sure they are correct. > journaled quotas (as standart) are much better. Exactly. > >> >>> >>> 3. I tend to think nowdays such quotas maybe of less need. Quota code doesn't scale well. And it's easier to put container in image file (as OpenVZ recently introduced). >> >> There have such requirements dropped to LXC mail list nowadays. >> Directory quota is pretty cool and it also useful to containers perspective. >> >> However, that's two different quota mechanism. >> >> "Quota code doesn't scale well". >> Do you means it have global locking mechanism and only quota structure >> to bill up quota for all file systems with VFS quota enabled? > > yes. That's also means there has a potential opportunity for improvement in terms of scalability. Thanks for your info! -Jeff > > Kirill > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
