Jonah,
> Don't get me wrong, I think we need tablespace maximums. What I'm
> looking at is a user/group-based quota which would allow a superuser to
> grant say, 2G of space to a user or group. Any object that user owned
> would be included in the space allocation.
>
> So, if the user owns three tablespaces, they can still only have a
> maximum of 2G total. This is where I think it would be wise to allow
> the tablespace owner and/or superuser to set the maximum size of a
> tablespace.
Yeah, the problem is that with the upcoming "group ownership" I see
user-based quotas as being rather difficult to implement unambiguously.
Even more so when we get "local users" in the future. So I'd only want
to do it if there was a real-world use case that tablespace quotas
wouldn't satisfy.
For the basic ISP space, tablespace quotas seem a lot more apt for that
case. You give each user a database, and put it in its own tablespace and
don't give them permissions to change it. That way you could have user
e-mail, web, and database in the same directory tree for easy
backup/transfer. It also means that you can use filesystem controls to
double-check the tablespace maximums.
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco