[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87r5nq9b9s.fsf@openvz.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 11:47:43 +0300
From: Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@...nvz.org>
To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com>
Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] vfs: Add additional owner identifier
Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com> writes:
> On 2010-03-11, at 11:51, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 04:11:57PM +0300, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
>>> Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> writes:
>>>> There's really no reason to make this a config option.
>>> Project id feature is not likely to be widely used (i hope only
>>> at the beginning). Personally this is not bad to avoid config option.
>>> At least we will have many new users for free. But I predict
>>> many angry voices against enabling this feature by default.
>>
>> How would those "angry voices" notice this feature?
>
>
> The embedded folks are continually complaining about kernel bloat.
>
> I don't see it as a bad thing that there is a config option for a
> feature that will likely be used by < 1% of Linux users.
Definitely we have to hide projectid under kernel config option, bu,t
what option should it be? We have two choices
1) CONFIG_QUOTA: because most of users who use quota probably
will also use project id support
2) introduce new config option: This may be reasonable if projectid
may be usefull witout quota and inode size is critical.
(i dont know such cases for now)
>
> Cheers, Andreas
> --
> Andreas Dilger
> Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
> Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists