> Simon Kirby wrote:
>
> > I have also had to raise the limit on our webservers here...Is there
> > anything wrong with setting the initial limit to something like 4096 or
> > even higher? It only gets allocated when needed, correct? It's also not
> > something a user is going to be able to abuse...or is it?
>
> Quota is allocated when needed but never freed, so the number should stabilize at some
> point and not need to be raised. Setting the quota max to a level comparable but
> smaller than inode max would probably be a good starting point. It's possible that
> under some conditions quota max might need to be greater than inode max -- with both
> user and group quotas enabled, one inode might need two dquots.
>
> Also, you should be able to increase quota max on the fly (as root) if you're getting
> "waiting for quota" messages.
Right...but I was talking about changing the default of 256 in the
kernel. Would it be a good idea?
Simon-
| Simon Kirby | Systems Administration |
| mailto:sim@netnation.com | NetNation Communications |
| http://www.netnation.com/ | Tech: (604) 684-6892 |
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/