Re: [patch] smarter atime updates

H. Peter Anvin
2001-11-30T23:32:10Z

Followup to: <20011130143011.A20179@netnation.com>
By author: Simon Kirby <sim@netnation.com>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> I've always thought filesystems should mount with noatime,nodiratime by
> default and only actually update atime if specifically mounted with
> "atime", as it's so rarely used. Out of all of the servers here, none
> actually use atime (every file system on _every_ server is mounted
> noatime,nodiratime). It's such a waste and just sounds fundamentally
> broken to issue a write because somebody read from a file.
>
> ...But there's probably some POSIX standard which would make such a
> change illegal. Blah blah...
>
> (Not to say that atime isn't useful, but in most cases where it might be
> useful, it is so easily broken by backup processes, etc., that it really
> wants to be a different sort of mechanism.)
>

Edit /etc/fstab and be happy. I'm sorry, but you even know why your
request is unacceptable.

-hpa
--
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt <amsp@zytor.com>