From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Relative lazy atime Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2006 14:25:37 +0200 Message-ID: <20060805122537.GA23239@lst.de> References: <20060803063622.GB8631@goober> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Akkana Peck , Mark Fasheh , Jesse Barnes , Arjan van de Ven , Chris Wedgwood , jsipek@cs.sunysb.edu, Al Viro , Christoph Hellwig Return-path: Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.210]:35204 "EHLO mail.lst.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161312AbWHEM0u (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Aug 2006 08:26:50 -0400 To: Valerie Henson Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060803063622.GB8631@goober> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 11:36:22PM -0700, Valerie Henson wrote: > (Corrected Chris Wedgwood's name and email.) > > My friend Akkana followed my advice to use noatime on one of her > machines, but discovered that mutt was unusable because it always > thought that new messages had arrived since the last time it had > checked a folder (mbox format). I thought this was a bummer, so I > wrote a "relative lazy atime" patch which only updates the atime if > the old atime was less than the ctime or mtime. This is not the same > as the lazy atime patch of yore[1], which maintained a list of inodes > with dirty atimes and wrote them out on unmount. Another idea, similar to how atime updates work in xfs currently might be interesting: Always update atime in core, but don't start a transaction just for it - instead only flush it when you'd do it anyway, that is another transaction or evicting the inode.