On Sat, 4 August 2007 21:21:30 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
quoted text
> * Jörn Engel <joern@logfs.org> wrote:
> 
> > > I actually vote for that.  IMO, distros should turn -on- atime 
> > > updates when they know its needed.
> > 
> > If you mean "relatime" I concur.  "noatime" hurts mutt and others 
> > while "relatime" has no known problems, afaics.
> 
> so ... one app can keep 30,000+ apps hostage?
> 
> i use Mutt myself, on such a filesystem:
> 
>    /dev/md0 on / type ext3 (rw,noatime,nodiratime,user_xattr)
> 
> and i can see no problems, it notices new mails just fine.

Given the choice between only "atime" and "noatime" I'd agree with you.
Heck, I use it myself.  But "relatime" seems to combine the best of both
worlds.  It currently just suffers from mount not supporting it in any
relevant distro.

Jörn

-- 
Joern's library part 2:
http://www.art.net/~hopkins/Don/unix-haters/tirix/embarrassing-memo.html
-
unsubscribe notice
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/