On 6/12/08 1:46 PM, "Chris Siebenmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | Every time I've come across a usage scenario where the submitter asks > | for per user quotas, its usually a university type scenario where > | univeristies are notorious for providing lots of CPU horsepower (many, > | many servers) attached to a simply dismal amount of back-end storage. > > Speaking as one of those pesky university people (although we don't use > quotas): one of the reasons this happens is that servers are a lot less > expensive than disk space. With disk space you have to factor in the > cost of backups and ongoing maintenance, wheras another server is just N > thousand dollars in one time costs and some rack space. > > (This assumes that you are not rack space, heat, or power constrained, > which I think most university environments generally are not.) > > Or to put it another way: disk space is a permanent commitment, > servers are not. > > - cks Well, servers have a "running cost," as keeping them up (e.g. running and still under your control!) requires a certain commitment of resources. But, I think the resource emphasis on storage is quite appropriate. The DATA are the valuable things, not the servers or applications. Appropriately, servers reached commodity status before storage. But storage hardware will go that way, and the focus will be on data (storage) management, where it rightfully belongs. Charles ----- Charles Soto [EMAIL PROTECTED] Director, Information Technology TEL: 512-740-1888 The University of Texas at Austin FAX: 512-475-9711 College of Communication, CMA 5.150G 1 University Station A0900, Austin, TX 78712 http://communication.utexas.edu/technology/ _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
