Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sun, 9 Sep 2001 17:39:47 -0700 | From | Simon Kirby <> | Subject | Re: linux-2.4.10-pre5 |
| |
On Sun, Sep 09, 2001 at 01:18:57PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> The main reason people seems to still justify use dump/restore is -- > believe it or not -- the inability to set atime. One would think this > would be a trivial extension to the VFS, even if protected by a > capability (CAP_BACKUP?).
What do people actually use atime for, anyway? I've always noatime/nodiratime'd most servers I've set up because it saves so much disk I/O, and I have yet to see anything really use it. I can see that in some cases it would be useful to turn it _on_ (perhaps for debugging / removal of unused files, etc.), but it seems silly that the default case is a situation which on the surface seems dumb (opening a file for read causes a disk write).
Simon-
[ Stormix Technologies Inc. ][ NetNation Communications Inc. ] [ sim@stormix.com ][ sim@netnation.com ] [ Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employers. ] - 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/
|  |