Re: [PATCH 00/23] per device dirty throttling -v8

Bill Davidsen
2007-08-08T17:41:46Z

Alan Cox wrote:
>> However, relatime has the POSIX behavior without the overhead. Therefore
>
> No. relatime has approximately SuS behaviour. Its not the same as
> "correct" behaviour.
>
Actually correct, but in terms of what can or does break, relatime seems
a lot closer than noatime, I can't (personally) come up with any
scenario where real applications would see something which would change
behavior adversely.

Making noatime a default in the kernel requiring a boot option to
restore current behavior seems to be a turn toward the "it doesn't
really work right but it's *fast*" model. If vendors wanted noatime they
are smart enough to enable it. Now with relatime giving most of the
benefits and few (of any) of the side effects, I would expect a change.

By all means relatime by default in FC8, but not noatime, and let those
who find some measurable benefit from noatime use it.

--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot