Josh,
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.
As I see it, these seem to be two distinct issues. Is this correct?
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Jonah,
>
>
>>A quota is significantly different from a maximum size. I was thinking
>>more along the lines of the following:
>
>
> Hmmm. Can you give me a case where we need per-user quotas that would not be
> satisfied by tablespace maximums? I'm not understanding the rationale, and
> I see several serious implementation issues with user-based quotas. But I'm
> not the target audience so maybe I just don't understand.
>
--
Jonah H. Harris, UNIX Administrator | phone: 505.224.4814
Albuquerque TVI | fax: 505.224.3014
525 Buena Vista SE | jharris@tvi.edu
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87106 | http://w3.tvi.edu/~jharris/
A hacker on a roll may be able to produce, in a period of a few
months, something that a small development group (say, 7-8 people)
would have a hard time getting together over a year. IBM used to
report that certain programmers might be as much as 100 times as
productive as other workers, or more.
-- Peter Seebach