Is quota enough reliable ?

Is quota enough reliable ?

Post by Nico Tranquil » Sat, 21 Oct 1995 04:00:00



Hello,
I tried to patch the kernel with accounting and quota support.
Everything seems to be Ok but I'm not sure I can trust on quota since
the patch was for an older version of the kernel (mine is 1.2.13) and I had
to patch by hand (open.c.rej). Have someone out there used the quota for a long
time on a linux box with no problem ? Can I trust or I'd better turning
it off ?

Ciao,
Nico

--

URL:  http://www.cli.di.unipi.it/~tranquil/    |   Double your drive space,
voice:  +39 (50) 599800  /  +39 (50) 550266    |   delete Windows !
Computer Science, University of Pisa -ITALY    |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

Is quota enough reliable ?

Post by Joseph Y Ch » Sun, 22 Oct 1995 04:00:00


: Hello,
: I tried to patch the kernel with accounting and quota support.
: Everything seems to be Ok but I'm not sure I can trust on quota since
: the patch was for an older version of the kernel (mine is 1.2.13) and I had
: to patch by hand (open.c.rej). Have someone out there used the quota for a long
: time on a linux box with no problem ? Can I trust or I'd better turning
: it off ?

: Ciao,
: Nico

It's reliable, at leat for my linux box.  I've been using quota for 4
months and never encounter any problem with it (there are 8 user accounts
in it).  I grabbed a pre-patched kernel 1.2.13 for a ftp site which I
can't remeber its addess from my head now.  If you need it mail me and
I'll send it to you.  Oh..., I can put it in my ftp site:
ftp://celab3.ce.arizona.edu/pub/linux-kernel-with-quota/

--joe

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Y Chen, grad student
Department of Civil Engineering & Engineering Mechanics
University of Arizona, USA


 
 
 

Is quota enough reliable ?

Post by Danny ter Ha » Mon, 23 Oct 1995 04:00:00




>: Hello,
>: I tried to patch the kernel with accounting and quota support.
>: Everything seems to be Ok but I'm not sure I can trust on quota since
>: the patch was for an older version of the kernel (mine is 1.2.13) and I had
>: to patch by hand (open.c.rej). Have someone out there used the quota for a long
>: time on a linux box with no problem ? Can I trust or I'd better turning
>: it off ?

>It's reliable, at leat for my linux box.  I've been using quota for 4
>months and never encounter any problem with it (there are 8 user accounts
>in it).  I grabbed a pre-patched kernel 1.2.13 for a ftp site which I
>can't remeber its addess from my head now.  If you need it mail me and
>I'll send it to you.  Oh..., I can put it in my ftp site:
>ftp://celab3.ce.arizona.edu/pub/linux-kernel-with-quota/

>--joe

We are an ISP using linux and happen to be the home site of the quota
developers (marco and ed). We couldn't live without quota.
Our account machine runs 1.2.13 (+ strace patch) & quota.
works like a charm for over 6 months now.

At our site you can find patches and complete kernels for
quota

ftp.cistron.nl:/pub/os/linux/kernel/v1.3 or v1.2

For more info:
http://www.cistron.nl/~mvw (authors home page)

Good luck,

Danny
Good luck

--

Cistron Internet Services, Independent Dutch Internet Provider

   +31-172-419445 (Voice) 430979 (Fax) 442580 (Data) - Alphen a/d Rijn

 
 
 

Is quota enough reliable ?

Post by Evgeny Stambulch » Tue, 24 Oct 1995 04:00:00




Quote:>We are an ISP using linux and happen to be the home site of the quota
>developers (marco and ed). We couldn't live without quota.
>Our account machine runs 1.2.13 (+ strace patch) & quota.
>works like a charm for over 6 months now.

>At our site you can find patches and complete kernels for
>quota

>ftp.cistron.nl:/pub/os/linux/kernel/v1.3 or v1.2

>For more info:
>http://www.cistron.nl/~mvw (authors home page)

I tried those patches for 1.2.13, too, and they completely suck with NFS!
Namely, copying file to NFS-mounted partition with quotas enabled (on the
server, of course) make no changes to quota usage, i.e. given I have 10 MB
disk usage, after copying & and deleting a 1MB file 10 times `quota' tells
I'm using 0 blocks!

 Evgeny

--

   __________________________________________________________________

 /  Plasma Laboratory, Weizmann Institute of Science, Israel  ======  \
 |  Phone : (972)8-343-610  ========================================  |
 |  FAX   : (972)8-344-106  ========================================  |
 |  ================================================================  |
 |  Look at our home page - http://plasma-gate.weizmann.ac.il  =====  |
 |____________________________________________________________________|

 
 
 

Is quota enough reliable ?

Post by Evgeny Stambulch » Fri, 27 Oct 1995 04:00:00




Quote:

>So the linux server is equiped with with quota and writing from another
>computer to this nfs partition isn't limited by quota ? Is that
>what you are telling us ?

Exactly.

Quote:>Instead of your "*" reply,

May be it was childish - ok; but it's not more "*" than saying somehting
"works like charm" based on single person (==box) expirience.

Quote:> could you have thought about sending
>an email to the author regarding this problem ?
>Sounds like a better thing to do ....

I intended to do so; but here came your followup (just on the day I tried new
quotas). So, I thought it's the same 'cause you're from the same (linux!)
site.

BTW, as we "couldn't live without quota", too, I switched back to quotas-1.33.

Evgeny

--

   __________________________________________________________________

 /  Plasma Laboratory, Weizmann Institute of Science, Israel  ======  \
 |  Phone : (972)8-343-610  ========================================  |
 |  FAX   : (972)8-344-106  ========================================  |
 |  ================================================================  |
 |  Look at our home page - http://www.veryComputer.com/  =====  |
 |____________________________________________________________________|

 
 
 

Is quota enough reliable ?

Post by Evgeny Stambulch » Mon, 30 Oct 1995 03:00:00




Quote:>There is a list of people who have quota up and running and never heard
>this before.

Over NFS?

Quote:>I do remember something about some kind of remote protocol
>to have quota over nfs. WE have tested quota together with sunos4.1.3
>boxes and from what i remember this worked for us ....

Hmm, it looks strange.

Quote:>>> could you have thought about sending an email to the author regarding
>>>this problem ?
>>I intended to do so; but here came your followup (just on the day I tried new
>>quotas). So, I thought it's the same 'cause you're from the same (linux!)
>>site.
>So ? I dont get the point here....

The point is authors of quota should have their newsreadres tuned to hot
any *quota*-containing messages; if you insist I'm wrong I'll send this stuff
directly by email.

Quote:>We are developers for linux on more than one front.
>*Plus* we are an ISP using linux as our main OS in which we need quota.
>This should give you the idea that we are serious about quota.

I'm maintaining bunch (>10) of linux boxes mounting 20+ users' home dirs from
NFS server (linux, too), so I'm serious about quotas either.

Quote:>>BTW, as we "couldn't live without quota", too, I switched back to quotas-1.33.
>?? which version ? We are still using 1.2.pre14 (13 with strace patch)

Server is 1.2.13+kswap; clients are 1.2.1, 1.2.10, 1.2.13+kswap

Quote:>We are currently running 1.3.34 on our news server (without quota).
>Although all our developer machines run 1.3.x kernels with quota without
>problems.

As I said before, the problem is with NFS; being on the server side, the quota
seemed to work ok.

Evgeny

--

   __________________________________________________________________

 /  Plasma Laboratory, Weizmann Institute of Science, Israel  ======  \
 |  Phone : (972)8-343-610  ========================================  |
 |  FAX   : (972)8-344-106  ========================================  |
 |  ================================================================  |
 |  Look at our home page - http://plasma-gate.weizmann.ac.il  =====  |
 |____________________________________________________________________|

 
 
 

Is quota enough reliable ?

Post by Danny ter Ha » Tue, 31 Oct 1995 04:00:00




>> We are developers for linux on more than one front.
>> *Plus* we are an ISP using linux as our main OS in which we need quota.
>> This should give you the idea that we are serious about quota.

>Danny, I don't want to be rude, but if the quota patches are so good why
>aren't they in the Linux kernel?

>Thanx!

>Regards,
>Carlos Antunes.

Everytime linus makes a new kernel version we try and send him a new diff.
Last time he wanted some changes which were made in a few days.
Since then i havent heard from linus about quota.

Really, we tried a _LOT_ of times but for some reason he wont put them
in. In the mean time, you can get both complete kernel sources and
the patches from our site ...

Danny

--

Cistron Internet Services, Independent Dutch Internet Provider

   +31-172-419445 (Voice) 430979 (Fax) 442580 (Data) - Alphen a/d Rijn

 
 
 

Is quota enough reliable ?

Post by Carolyn Beckm » Thu, 02 Nov 1995 04:00:00



: >
: >
: Everytime linus makes a new kernel version we try and send him a new diff.
: Last time he wanted some changes which were made in a few days.
: Since then i havent heard from linus about quota.

: Really, we tried a _LOT_ of times but for some reason he wont put them
: in. In the mean time, you can get both complete kernel sources and
: the patches from our site ...

I've been running the 1.3.35 with quota for a few days.  The quota
part is okay but I managed to crash the kernel with a run away process.
All I did was try quotachk.  It is slackware 2.2.  I think I will
try kernel 1.3.32 which is reported to be a bit more stable. Crash?
What a mess.  But 1.3.xx kernels are so nice otherwise. It is hard
to resist. :-)
--
=======================================================================

Carolyn Beckman
=======================================================================

 
 
 

Is quota enough reliable ?

Post by Carlos M. S. Antun » Sat, 04 Nov 1995 04:00:00



Quote:> Really, we tried a _LOT_ of times but for some reason he wont put them
> in. In the mean time, you can get both complete kernel sources and
> the patches from our site ...

Last time I heard Linus talk about this (in the linux-kernel mailing
list) he told that the quota pathces weren't stable enough...

Regards,
Carlos Antunes.

--
o---------------------------------o o-------------------------------------o
|  Carlos Antunes - CFN SysAdmin  | | "The important thing is not to stop |
| http://www.cfn.ist.utl.pt/~cmsa | |   questioning." -- Albert Einstein  |
o---------------------------------o o-------------------------------------o

 
 
 

Is quota enough reliable ?

Post by Danny ter Ha » Mon, 06 Nov 1995 04:00:00




>> Really, we tried a _LOT_ of times but for some reason he wont put them
>> in. In the mean time, you can get both complete kernel sources and
>> the patches from our site ...

>Last time I heard Linus talk about this (in the linux-kernel mailing
>list) he told that the quota pathces weren't stable enough...

>Regards,
>Carlos Antunes.

>--

1.3.x kernels are development kernels anyway. They aren't supposed to be
stable but to help to develop new uitlities like quota.
You would me, the author (marco) and a lot of other people a great
pleasure by downloading the patches, apply them and report BUGS so we
can fix them in order to make them better/faster/cleaner ..
Isn't this the general idea about linux development in general ????

greetings,

Danny

--

Cistron Internet Services, Independent Dutch Internet Provider

   +31-172-419445 (Voice) 430979 (Fax) 442580 (Data) - Alphen a/d Rijn

 
 
 

Is quota enough reliable ?

Post by Jared Mau » Wed, 08 Nov 1995 04:00:00






>>> Really, we tried a _LOT_ of times but for some reason he wont put them
>>> in. In the mean time, you can get both complete kernel sources and
>>> the patches from our site ...
>>Last time I heard Linus talk about this (in the linux-kernel mailing
>>list) he told that the quota pathces weren't stable enough...

        The linux quota patches have some bugs in them.  I dunno if this is
just with my system, or if it has a problem scaling, or what..

        I've got a p66 w/ a 4 gigs of disk, and 1 gig of that is quotaized.
Perodically users report that they have 200k of files, and it says that they
have over their 3MB quota.  There are roughly 3000 users on this filesystem,
and i've got them set up with *group* quotas.

        This is an instability that needs to be figured out by the author,
and I'm more than willing to work with him and give him access to my box
to do so.

Quote:>1.3.x kernels are development kernels anyway. They aren't supposed to be
>stable but to help to develop new uitlities like quota.
>You would me, the author (marco) and a lot of other people a great
>pleasure by downloading the patches, apply them and report BUGS so we
>can fix them in order to make them better/faster/cleaner ..
>Isn't this the general idea about linux development in general ????

        Do you have some utilities that might help me track down this problem?
Please let me know.

        - Jared

--
Jared Mauch                     CIC Network Solutions

Nameservice, Unix Support, Internal Netware Support
Voice: +1 313 998 8227  

 
 
 

Is quota enough reliable ?

Post by bill davids » Thu, 09 Nov 1995 04:00:00





|
| > Really, we tried a _LOT_ of times but for some reason he wont put them
| > in. In the mean time, you can get both complete kernel sources and
| > the patches from our site ...
|
| Last time I heard Linus talk about this (in the linux-kernel mailing
| list) he told that the quota pathces weren't stable enough...

He has the last word, but (a) 1.3 is a development kernel, (b)
configuration can take the patches completely out if you don't use
quota, and (c) looking at some of the stuff which has made it into
1.3, I can't see stability as an issue.

I wouldn't use a 1.3 kernel on a production system on a bet,
although if some new feature comes along which needs a new kernel I
might have to. This is not at all like the 1.0 vs. 1.1 situation,
where the 1.0 kernel was stable but sadly limited. While there is
some new stuff in the 1.3 kernel, the 1.2 is able to handle serious
commercial production.

 
 
 

Is quota enough reliable ?

Post by Carlos M. S. Antun » Thu, 09 Nov 1995 04:00:00



Quote:> 1.3.x kernels are development kernels anyway. They aren't supposed to be
> stable but to help to develop new uitlities like quota.
> You would me, the author (marco) and a lot of other people a great
> pleasure by downloading the patches, apply them and report BUGS so we
> can fix them in order to make them better/faster/cleaner ..
> Isn't this the general idea about linux development in general ????

I agree, but for some reason, Linus doesn't like the quota patches. Do
you know the reason (Linus prejudice? What?)

Regards,
Carlos Antunes.

--
o---------------------------------o o-------------------------------------o
|  Carlos Antunes - CFN SysAdmin  | | "The important thing is not to stop |
| http://www.cfn.ist.utl.pt/~cmsa | |   questioning." -- Albert Einstein  |
o---------------------------------o o-------------------------------------o

 
 
 

Is quota enough reliable ?

Post by Danny ter Ha » Sat, 11 Nov 1995 04:00:00



Quote:>> pleasure by downloading the patches, apply them and report BUGS so we
>> can fix them in order to make them better/faster/cleaner ..
>> Isn't this the general idea about linux development in general ????

>I agree, but for some reason, Linus doesn't like the quota patches. Do
>you know the reason (Linus prejudice? What?)

Last time he gave us some comments about certain code. We changed it
accordingly to his whishes. never heard of it since ...
(and we really try ;-)

Danny

--

Cistron Internet Services, Independent Dutch Internet Provider

   +31-172-419445 (Voice) 430979 (Fax) 442580 (Data) - Alphen a/d Rijn

 
 
 

1. Restore 100GB in 2 hours / Sun SSA not reliable enough?

A project with around 150GB is going to be implemented.
Vendor suggested using VxFS + Clariion, and a
6 x 17GB RAID5 diskgroup. Is it possible to use whatever
backup device to achieve a restore speed of ~50GB/hr?

Moreover, we have been using Sun's Enterprise VM 2.5
with SPARCstorage Array 100, and RAID5 with log disk.
We have came across an accident that a naughty operator
switched off the SSA while the server was still writing to a RAID5
group inside,  it was then found that the RAID5 had two 'plex'
damaged, i.e. the whole 10GB data was destroyed!  In fact, we
found that whenever a block error occurs the whole 'plex' is marked
destroyed, i.e., if a whole disk is used as a plex the whole disk
(17GB maybe) will be destroyed!

Is the solution we are using really that fragile? Will the VxFS + Clariion
be better. We really don't want any power-trip to destroy data (and
the vendor claimed the new solution can do this).

What are you guys using for mission-critical projects?

2. DS3 card w/ linux?

3. Quotas : Format of quota.users & quota.groups ?

4. Loading modules via network with grub

5. Is pkgchk reliable also is pkgadd reliable ?? 2.3

6. changing escape character key

7. out of space when quota is off and df says I am at 49%

8. pkg_add Help

9. Am I stupid or quotas on Red Hat 7.1 are broken?

10. Enough is enough

11. Good Enough to Sleep With but not Good Enough to Marry?

12. 3c509: Enough is enough!

13. Deep thoughts...Good Enough Is Enough