;-)
Ignore my other message on mmcheckquota then. On 2014 Nov 27. md, at 18:02 st, Jonathan Buzzard wrote: > On Thu, 2014-11-27 at 09:47 +0000, Jonathan Buzzard wrote: >> On Wed, 2014-11-26 at 10:14 +0000, Laurence Alexander Hurst wrote: >>> Hmm, mmrepquota is reporting no files owned by any of the users in >>> question. I¹ll see if `find` disagrees. >>> They have the default fileset >>> user quotas applied, so they¹re not users we¹ve edited to grant quota >>> extensions to. We have had a problem (which IBM have acknowledged, iirc) >>> whereby it is not possible to reset a user¹s quota back to the default if >>> it has been modified, perhaps this is related? I¹ll see if `find` turns >>> anything up or I¹ll raise a ticket with IBM and see what they think. >>> >>> I¹ve pulled out a single example, but all 75 users I have are the same. >>> >>> mmrepquota gpfs | grep 8695 >>> 8695 nbu USR 0 0 5368709120 0 >>> none | 0 0 0 0 none >>> 8695 bb USR 0 0 1073741824 0 >>> none | 0 0 0 0 none >>> >> >> While the number of files and usage is zero look at those "in doubt" >> numbers. > > Ignore that those are quota numbers. Hard when the column headings are > missing. > > Anyway a "Homer Simpson" momentum coming up... > > Simple answer really remove the quotas for those users in those file > sets (I am presuming they are per fileset user hard limits). They are > sticking around in mmrepquota because they have a hard limit set. D'oh! > > JAB. > > -- > Jonathan A. Buzzard Email: jonathan (at) buzzard.me.uk > Fife, United Kingdom. > > > _______________________________________________ > gpfsug-discuss mailing list > gpfsug-discuss at gpfsug.org > http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss _______________________________________________ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at gpfsug.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
