Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 05:46:36 +0800 From: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans), Don.Lewis@tsc.tdk.com, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, roberto@keltia.freenix.fr Subject: Re: Softupdates panics Message-ID: <199809272146.FAA14600@spinner.netplex.com.au> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 27 Sep 1998 20:01:31 GMT." <199809272001.NAA27569@usr05.primenet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert wrote: > > >} > added `noatime' to two of my heavily used softupdates slices in > > >} > > >} noatime with SU is a known Bad Thing[tm]. > > > > > >I hadn't heard this. I don't know why that would be true. > > > > It is superstition. Perhaps stamping atimes hides some bugs in > > softupdates by causing more frequent updates or changing the timing > > of the updates. > > Doing "noatime" results in the loss of an inode write order > dependency. So? what's being written while you're reading a file? If you're reading and writing the file together, then the modtime stamps will cause the inode to be written out. If you're just reading, there is no metadata dependency at all because nothing is changed at all. Had anybody got problems with softupdates that can be specifically attributed to the use of -noatime ? Cheers, -Peter To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199809272146.FAA14600>