linux-2.4.9-ac5, ext3 and disk quota

[Steffen Moser <lists steffen-moser de>]

Hello,

I am going to set up a new file server ("smb" and "nfs") machine for 
the local network of my former school.

Therefore I've just downloaded and successfully compiled
"linux-2.4.9-ac5" (including "disk quota support" and, of course,
support for "ext3 file system"). 

I've read the statement:

 | ...
 |
 | The quota code in the -ac kernels is very different, and once that gets
 | merged into Linus' tree we shall continue development and testing of
 | quota code for ext3. 
 | 
 | ...
 |
 | We only test quota code against the -ac kernels - this is supported 
 | and works well.

which is given on:

  http://www.uow.edu.au/~andrewm/linux/ext3/ext3-usage.html

When setting up the disk quotas I have to choice between two available 
quota formats:

   vfsold - original quota format

and

   vfsv0 - new quota format

Now, my question is: Does the above quoted statment have something to do 
with the selection of the quota format? That means: Do I have to use the
new format "vfsv0" to avoid conflicts with "ext3" or is also the
"vfsold"-code that comes with Alan Cox' kernels rewritten so "vfsold"
would not influence "ext3" in a negative way?

I suppose that SAMBA (2.2.1a and 2.0.10) seems not to be able to get the 
available disk space from disk quotas when using "vfsv0". For now I've 
installed "vfsv0", but SAMBA simply shows the free space of the specified 
partition, although the user has got a much lower disk quota (of course, 
SAMBA has been configured "--with-quotas"). I must admit that I have not 
tested "vfsold" on this machine, yet. 

So my question: Do I have to expect any (known) problems when using the
"vfsold" quota format together with "ext3"? 

The whole system is running on software RAID (level 1), but I don't expect 
that this interferes with "ext3" on 2.4 kernels.

My last question: is there anybody who is using "ext3", "disk quotas"
and software RAID in a production environment?

Regards,
Steffen