The complaint is not new, and the problem isn't quotas or lack thereof. The problem is that remote filesystem clients can't cope with frequent changes to a server's share list, which is just ZFS's "filesystems are cheap" approach promotes.
Basically ZFS was ahead of everyone's implementation of NFSv4 client- side mount mirroring, which would very much help with the dynamic nature of ZFS usage. It does not help that no NFSv3 automounter is sufficiently dynamic to reasonably cope with filesystems coming and going. Given the automounter pain this customer would like to have one large filesystem and quotas. And that's how quotas are a secondary problem. _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
