Yeah, qtrees are a real life-saver, but you have to plan ahead on how to use them or you end up where you would have been without the qtrees.
In your environment, you might want to consider separating out the home directories and the corporate data into two separate volumes. This will allow you to make sales, products, etc., top level qtrees. This does require you to use a few more disks creating new, separate RAID groups (in the form of parity disks), but it may be worth it to gain that level of quota management.
Geoff Hardin geoff.hardin@dalsemi.com This space is for rent in order to increase company revenue.
Robert Watson wrote:
Hello All,
What a great list - I found the archives very helpful!
I am setting up a Filer, an F760 with ONTAP 6.3 and both NFS and CIFS licences. Based on what I have read I have configured our only shelf as a single large volume (with one disk left unused or spare). I then plan to use qtrees to implement the directory hierarchy seen by users.
What I would like to present to users is something like this:
filer: /home/ srb/ bwk/ ... /ics/ sales/ products/ support/ ...Where "ics" is our company name. I'm sure you see what I mean. So, for example, NFS users could mount either or both of "filer1:/home" and "filer1:/ics". Windows users would probably setup network connections to both "home" and "ics".
I have created a qtree "/vol/vol0/home" and copied some users home directories into it, this seems to work well. But I am a bit puzzled how to implement the company hierarchy. I think that ideally "sales", "support", etc. would be separate qtrees - but it seems that qtrees can only exist at the top level, so this is not possible?
Or, I could create "sales", "support", etc. as qtees directly at the top level but then users would have to mount each tree individually?
Or, I could create a single "company" qtree with the various functional directories under it... but then I would not be able to take advantage of qtree features such as having separate quotas and dumps for these different "functions".
Maybe I'm missing some key point here. Comments?
--
Yours, Robert Watson.