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    [W:0.021 / U:187.200 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site