Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 19:19:02 +0100 From: Roman Neuhauser <neuhauser@mobil.cz> To: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: noatime switch on local mount - anything really need the atime field ? Message-ID: <20020131191902.P68986@roman.mobil.cz> In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20020131112513.00aa6c20@postoffice.swbell.net> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20020131112513.00aa6c20@postoffice.swbell.net>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
> Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 11:36:48 -0600
> To: questions@freebsd.org
> From: Sean O'Neill <sean@seanoneill.info>
> Subject: noatime switch on local mount - anything really need the atime
> field ?
>
> Does anything really use the atime field of inodes?
>
> Reading that atime update really isn't that big of a hit for casual systems
> (expect for make world stuff) like mine but hey, never hurts to get a
> little more performance out of my box :)
MUAs use atime of mbox-type mailboxes to be able to tell whether new
mail has arrived. (Properly working MDA doesn't update atime when
storing a message in an mbox-type mailbox. MUA then sees mtime >
atime, and marks the mailbox as having new mail.)
--
FreeBSD 4.4-STABLE
7:16PM up 11 days, 1:39, 21 users, load averages: 0.04, 0.05, 0.05
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020131191902.P68986>