From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.133]:54752 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754623AbeFOHMh (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2018 03:12:37 -0400 Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 00:12:36 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: Reading/changing projid of a symlink Message-ID: <20180615071236.GA17459@infradead.org> References: <20180612143608.ok3jqtl3l34vdlpy@odin.usersys.redhat.com> <20180613094048.6becmt42cvdhvg66@odin.usersys.redhat.com> <20180615070829.m5ligybzlods4l5r@odin.usersys.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180615070829.m5ligybzlods4l5r@odin.usersys.redhat.com> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Ilya Pronin , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 09:08:29AM +0200, Carlos Maiolino wrote: > As I said before, IMHO, I believe the way you are using project quotas is wrong. > Project quotas is supposed to be used on a sub-tree based granularity, not on a > file based granularity. But again, that's just my opinion. That is not true. The per-file usage was indeed the original use case. The tree quoats implemented using the inheritance were added much latter. They are the common use case now, but that doesn't make other use cases wrong.