On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 04:35:31PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Nov 11, 2014, at 3:32 PM, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 11:00:25AM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> >> On Nov 11, 2014, at 8:36 AM, Stan Hoeppner
> >> <stan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> On 11/11/2014 04:22 AM, Cyril Scetbon wrote:
> >>>> That's what I've read first, but someone showed me a sample
> >>>> where it works. He just told me he was using project quota.
> >>>> However, does it make sense ? I've also read somewhere else
> >>>> that quota is never enforced for root user (id,gid=0) that's
> >>>> why I was testing it ....
> >>> No, it doesn't make sense. Why would you want to enforce
> >>> quotas for root?
> >> A week ago I tried this and project quotas appear to apply to
> >> root.
> > By intent and design. Project quotas are not a user/group based
> > quota and so there is no exemption for any user.
> Itâs what Iâd expect. I considered the documentation to be
> slightly misleading where is says soft and hard limits are never
> applied to the root user. The project quota does have a soft and
> hard limit. The soft limit, seemed not to apply to the root user -
> at least there was no soft limit warning anywhere when it was
> busted. But the hard limit definitely applied.
So write a patch to fix the documentation. Repo is here: