lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Aug]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Noatime vs relatime
On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 07:26:46AM -0700, Vlad wrote:
...
> "Warning: Atime will be disabled by default in future kernel versions,
> but you will still be able to turn it on when configuring the kernel."
>
> This should give a heads-up to the 0.001% of people who still use
> atime so that they know to customize this option or start using modern
> file-monitoring techniques like inotify.

NO for two reasons:
- atime semantics are just fine in server environments
- inotify IS NOT scalable to millions of files, nor
to situations where we want to check alteration weeks
or months after the fact

In reality I would perhaps prefer mount-behaviour being altered
from 'by default do atime' to 'by default do noatime.

There MUST be an easy way to tell system that "yes, I want to track
last accesstime."


I did recently an embedded Linux PC system where the entire
system disk is a single Compact Flash -card. I tried to play
with noatime option, but the system still kept writing things,
and thus I had to do full and somewhat drastic read-only.


> Vlad

/Matti Aarnio
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-08-10 17:13    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans