Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:11:04 -0700 (PDT) From: John Kozubik <john@kozubik.com> To: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: It's 2008. 1 TB disk drives cost $160. Quotas are 32-bit. Message-ID: <20080630073539.U1807@kozubik.com> In-Reply-To: <864p7bw387.fsf@ds4.des.no> References: <20080628132632.R1807@kozubik.com> <864p7bw387.fsf@ds4.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, [utf-8] Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav wrote: > John Kozubik <john@kozubik.com> writes: > > I needed to set a user quota of greater than 2 TB today. I failed, > > because FreeBSD does not have 64-bit quota tools. > > [long rant about how 64-bit quotas should take precedence over > > everything else we do] > > FreeBSD is a volunteer-driven open source project. Basically, this > means you don't get to dictate what people work on. It also means you > don't get to throw shit at people the way you just did. When I offered monetary rewards for these items: http://www.rsync.net/resources/notices/2007cb.html http://blog.kozubik.com/john_kozubik/2007/12/bounty-posted-f.html they were merely polite suggestions. That's because, at the end of the day, FreeBSD on the desktop, and these particular aspects of FreeBSD on the desktop, must be kept a bit down on the priority list. The core, expected functionality of a unix operating system are a different story. Nobody cares about your feelings. > > There is nothing new or experimental in moving quotas from 32 to 64 bit= =2E > > It breaks backward compat rather badly. All quotas need to be > recalculated, and there no way to tell whether the existing quota file > is 32-bit or 64-bit. As I said, nothing new or experimental. Please note that you've had five years to address this: http://www.freebsd.org/projects/bigdisk/index.html That task list, and the things left undone on it, are a joke. > > This is _as opposed to_ porting ZFS to FreeBSD, and gjournal, and every > > other shiny bauble that has monopolized freebsd-fs in the last four > > years. > > Those "shiny baubles", not quotas, are what make FreeBSD a viable server > operating system in 2008. You are wrong. No set of services is worthwhile[1] without a solid foundation. You may not use a lot of core, historical pieces of a unix system, but you should be alarmed to find them missing or broken. I regret not aggressively pursuing this four years ago. [1] I am _very_ excited about ZFS on FreeBSD and amazed at the great work that pjd and others have put into it. They have total freedom to pursue whatever they choose. However, FreeBSD has a core team for a reason - direction and priorities need to be set and followed. It is the asymmetry of attention and priority between the new and experimental and the old and foundational that I am so troubled with. ----- John Kozubik - john@kozubik.com - http://www.kozubik.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080630073539.U1807>