Quotas vs. Trash revisited
brennan at columbia.edu
Wed Dec 14 12:10:23 EST 2005
--On Wednesday, December 14, 2005 11:14 +0000 Rob McMahon
<rob.mcmahon at warwick.ac.uk> wrote:
> It occurred to me, though, that if we made the user.xxx.Trash folder a
> separate quota root with the same quota as their inbox these problems
> would go away. Can anyone see any problems with this ?
Might as well just double their quota. They could create a whole
set of archive mailboxes under Trash, right?
Note that the name Trash is not significant on the server side and
is chosen by the client. At least one client uses small t trash.
In an ideal world... wait, in an ideal world they wouldn't use a
trash folder, so forget that. Things to look out for:
- People who archive mail in Trash. Our helpdesk reports people
asking for backup restores on their trash on a regular basis.
- People who don't use a trash folder but name a folder trash for
some other reason. Is there a band named Trash? We've seen people
keeping mail about Columbia's Core Corriculum in folders named core.
Imagine if we removed old core dumps regularly.
Columbia University Information Technology
More information about the Info-cyrus