[LU-2299] System-wide quotas should not be enabled/disabled/set via a non-priviledged tool (lfs) Created: 07/Nov/12 Updated: 13/Feb/19 |
|
| Status: | Open |
| Project: | Lustre |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Improvement | Priority: | Minor |
| Reporter: | Nathan Rutman | Assignee: | WC Triage |
| Resolution: | Unresolved | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Rank (Obsolete): | 5492 |
| Description |
|
lfs is supposed to be used by non-privileged users for control of individual user files. Control over systemwide configuration should be concentrated in lctl. Like changelogs, control over quotas should be placed in lctl, while informational indications should remain in lfs. NAME NAME |
| Comments |
| Comment by Andreas Dilger [ 07/Nov/12 ] |
|
Johann, did this already change in 2.4? IIRC we are using a different mechanism for enabling quota on the servers with 2.4. |
| Comment by Niu Yawei (Inactive) [ 07/Nov/12 ] |
|
Yes, we now (in 2.4) use "lctl conf_param" to enable/disable quota for whole filesystem, the "lfs quotaon/off" is deprecated. Howerver, we still use "lfs setquota" to set limit for each user/group, I think the per-id quota set/get is supposed to be done by lfs, right? Thanks. |
| Comment by Nathan Rutman [ 08/Nov/12 ] |
I would still claim this needs to be an administrator only, and lfs was originally supposed to be a non-privileged user tool. Johann, I can't find your preso on new quotas - can you attach it to a ticket somewhere please? |
| Comment by Johann Lombardi (Inactive) [ 13/Nov/12 ] |
|
Hi Nathan, The quota presentations are attached to ORI-414. I also presented the new quota architecture briefly at the LUG: As for lfs setquota vs lctl setquota, i don't really care and i would be fine to add support for setquota to lctl and deprecate lfs setquota. |
| Comment by Johann Lombardi (Inactive) [ 20/Nov/12 ] |
|
Nathan, do you guys have any plan to work on a patch adding setquota support to lctl? Please advise. |
| Comment by Nathan Rutman [ 20/Nov/12 ] |
No, I'm just bitching that's where it should be. We had a customer messing with it and I realized it needs to be more controlled than it is. I figured since you are reworking it anyhow now's a good time to mention it. |