Disk space by uid (by group is a plus but not critical), like BSD and EXTn. And the reason I put "inode" in quotes was to indicate that they may not (certainly not) be called inodes but an upper limit to the total number of files and directories, typically to stop a runaway script or certain malicious or grossly irresponsible behavior.
From my reading the closest you can get to disk space quotas in ZFS is by limiting on a per directory (dataset, mount) basis which is similar but different.
On December 11, 2014 at 16:57 rs@seastrom.com (Rob Seastrom) wrote:
Barry Shein <bzs@world.std.com> writes:
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
We are now using ZFS RAIDZ and the question I ask myself is, why wasn't I using ZFS years ago?
because it is not production on linux, which i have to use because freebsd does not have kvm/ganeti. want zfs very very badly. snif.
I keep reading zfs vs btrfs articles and...inconclusive.
My problem with both is I need quotas, both file and "inode", and both are weaker than ext4 on that, zfs is very weak on this, you can only sort of simulate them.
By file, you mean "disk space used"? By whom and where? Quotas and reservations on a per-dataset basis are pretty darned well supported in ZFS. As for inodes, well, since there isn't really such a thing as an inode in ZFS... what exactly are you trying to do here?
-r
-- -Barry Shein The World | bzs@TheWorld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada Software Tool & Die | Public Access Internet | SINCE 1989 *oo*