From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dmitry Monakhov Subject: Re: [RFC] vfs generic subtree support Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 18:32:47 +0300 Message-ID: <87sk91i4bk.fsf@openvz.org> References: <87tythtptw.fsf@openvz.org> <20100216122029.GC30031@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <87bpfpcq55.fsf@openvz.org> <20100216133836.GD30031@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <87mxz9nutb.fsf@openvz.org> <20100216142154.GE30031@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <87hbphns33.fsf@openvz.org> <20100216151257.GK11239@parisc-linux.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Al Viro , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Matthew Wilcox Return-path: Received: from mail-bw0-f219.google.com ([209.85.218.219]:53812 "EHLO mail-bw0-f219.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752576Ab0BPPcw (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Feb 2010 10:32:52 -0500 Received: by bwz19 with SMTP id 19so4467757bwz.28 for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2010 07:32:50 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20100216151257.GK11239@parisc-linux.org> (Matthew Wilcox's message of "Tue, 16 Feb 2010 08:12:58 -0700") Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Matthew Wilcox writes: > On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 06:00:32PM +0300, Dmitry Monakhov wrote: >> Use-cases: >> *Assing maximum disc space consumption for some hierarchy * >> >> 1) Create chroot environment >> # tar xf chroot_env.tar /var/xxx/chroot >> 2) Assign some metagroup id to the chroot content (via not yet >> existent ./metagroup cmd-tool) >> # find /var/xxx/chroot | xargs ./metagroup --set 1000 >> >> 3) Setup quota limits >> # quota-set --type metagroup --blk_soft=1024M blk_hard=1024M /var >> >> 4) Export this tree (it may be more complex) >> # mount /var/xxx/chroot /mnt/chroot -obound >> >> 5)Now we may use this /mnt/chroot as: >> 5A) A regular chroot envirement, user is unable to exceed metagroup >> quota, regardless to real available space on /var/ >> 5B) As a container's (namespace) root. >> 5C) export this /mnt/chroot to nfs server and nfs client can not >> overcome given metagroup quota limit. > > This all seems quota-related ... do you envisage uses that aren't > quota-related? Yes. Since link/rename behavior is no longer depends on metagroup I'm consider it as quota related only.