On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 05:04:03PM -0500, Miles Nordin wrote: > As Tim said, the one-filesystem-per-user thing is not working out.
For NFSv3 clients that truncate MOUNT protocol answers (and v4 clients that still rely on the MOUNT protocol), yes, one-filesystem-per-user is a problem. For NFSv4 clients that support mirror mounts its not a problem at all. You're not required to go with one-filesystem-per-user though! That's only if you want to approximate quotas. > O(1) for number of filesystems would be great but isn't there. It is O(1) for filesystems (parts of the system could be parallelized more, but the on-disk data format is O(1) for filesystem creation and mounting, just like it is for snapshots and clones). > Maybe the format allows unlimited O(1) snapshots, but it's at best > O(1) to take them. All over the place it's probably O(n) or worse to > _have_ them. to boot with them, to scrub with them. It's NOT O(N) to boot because of snapshots, nor to scrub. Scrub and resilver are O(N) where N is the amount used (as opposed to O(N) where N is the size of the volume, for HW RAID and the like). Nico -- _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
