Re: Noatime vs relatime

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Vlad <vladc6@...>
Cc: <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Friday, August 10, 2007 - 11:10 am

On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 07:26:46AM -0700, Vlad wrote:
... 

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.



/Matti Aarnio
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Noatime vs relatime, Vlad, (Fri Aug 10, 10:26 am)
Re: Noatime vs relatime, Bill Davidsen, (Fri Aug 10, 3:29 pm)
Re: Noatime vs relatime, Matti Aarnio, (Fri Aug 10, 11:10 am)
Re: Noatime vs relatime, Rene Herman, (Fri Aug 10, 6:55 pm)
Re: Noatime vs relatime, Michael Poole, (Fri Aug 10, 10:51 am)
Re: Noatime vs relatime, Arjan van de Ven, (Fri Aug 10, 10:47 am)
Re: Noatime vs relatime, Xavier Bestel, (Fri Aug 10, 10:44 am)