Thanks Doug, perhaps we could about this at the Wednesday meeting next week.
n
Quoting Douglas Kenneth Hasell <hasell@MIT.EDU>:
> Hi,
>
> I have no problem with a quota system and maybe we should address this.
>
> The reason for not installing a larger drive is, I believe, that
> backups then become problematic. However, maybe we could have larger
> drives but reduce the backup load by backing up only certain
> directories or files.
>
> Certainly we can remove a lot of inactive users.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Douglas
>
> 26-415 M.I.T.
> Tel: +1 (617) 258-7199
> 77 Massachusetts Avenue Fax: +1
> (617) 258-5440
> Cambridge, MA 02139, USA E-mail:
> hasell@mit.edu
>
> On Dec 16, 2005, at 11:22 PM, Nikolas Meitanis wrote:
>
>> Not that anyone who matters is reading this exchange but FWIW:
>>
>> I agree with the quota system. You could limit each of the 10-15
>> active users to
>> a certain amount, the rest to something less and allow for some
>> extra space that
>> NEVER gets filled.
>>
>> Ernie was very responsive last time this happened and offered to
>> provide a solution at
>> the collaborations instructions.
>>
>> This WILL happen again. Around New Year's Eve if the trend
>> continues. Some folks
>> are actually doing analysis and need /home/blast.
>>
>> n
>>
>> Chi Zhang wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> as of 21:57 Dec. 16, /home/blast has 550k free space on it. the
>>> last time we discussed the same issue was Dec. 1st.
>>>
>>> I dare to suggest that the use of /home/blast be discussed in one
>>> of the so many meetings and a solution be worked out that would
>>> prevent the same situation to reemerge in at least the next six
>>> months.
>>>
>>> I can see a few approaches,
>>>
>>> 1. a quota system that limits the space of each user. since Ernie has made
>>> /scratch1/bud18 fully backed up, I do not see any reason to store
>>> big amount of data on /home/blast.
>>>
>>> 2. in crease the space in /home/blast. a 40G hard drive costs less
>>> than $100 retail. add a $100 to fully back up. People will still
>>> need to use restraint though as a Monte Carlo session could easily
>>> eat up gig bytes of data.
>>>
>>> 3. deprecate some inactive users. However, the decision about who
>>> to remove will need to be made by the administration level.
>>>
>>> 4. not quite realistically, maybe a different net work topology.
>>>
>>> BTW, the blasttalk archive is being swamped by messaged from crond
>>> daemon seemingly originated from blast02
>>>
>>> Chi
>>>
>>> On Fri, 16 Dec 2005, Chi Zhang wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dear collaborations
>>>>
>>>> I am retyping this message again. as space is still not available
>>>> on /home/blast which is required by communication between CPUs in
>>>> the daq network and the communication from out side.
>>>>
>>>> Having to bang my head on the wall working with the data full of
>>>> problems is agitating enough by itself. why do I then have to be
>>>> interupted by such nuisance repeatedly.
>>>>
>>>> Yours
>>>>
>>>> Chi Zhang
>>>>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Feb 24 2014 - 14:07:32 EST