Sure no problem. Just out of curiousity, was someone screwing around with
ownership to give themselves more space?
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:124f501c3f5fe$b911ddc0$(E-Mail Removed)...
> ok. it is based on the owner of the file. we just found
> out that the ownership of the files were manipulated.
>
> thanks anyway.
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >i believe the quota is based on what is saved by the
> owner
> >or logon account and not by owner of the file. we tested
> >on another machine by copying some files from other
> owners
> >to the current logon account and found the "quota entries
> >window" does reflects the actual size of space used.
> >
> >regards
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>I Believe quota is judged by "owner" of the file. have
> >you checked to see
> >>whether or not the people who should be limited are
> >actually the owners of
> >>the files?
> >>
> >>Best Regards,
> >>Sam
> >>
> >>
> >>"Yoon Kee" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
> in
> >message
> >>news:10ea401c3f53b$9a1db6a0$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >>> we have enabled the quota management and have been
> using
> >>> it for the past 1 year. the amount disk space used
> >(shown
> >>> in the "quota entries" window) has been showing all
> >users
> >>> and their quota reached.
> >>>
> >>> but recently we realized that the amount disk space
> used
> >>> (in the "quota entries" windows) for all users have not
> >>> been updated. when checked on the actual storage space
> >>> for all users, the size is bigger than the "quota
> >entries
> >>> window".
> >>>
> >>> so we tried by creating a new logon account and
> assigned
> >>> quota limit to it. we save big files with this
> account.
> >>> we then checked the actual disk space and found it did
> >>> took up some space. but on the "quota entries
> window",
> >it
> >>> still shows 100% free space for the allocated logon
> >>> account.
> >>>
> >>> we then tried to save files until it exceeds the quota
> >and
> >>> found that we can still save beyond the allocated
> quota.
> >>>
> >>> anyone come across this behaviour?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>.
> >>
> >.
> >
|