From nobody Wed Jan 10 12:27:33 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-current@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4T96Wg10QPz56qxt for ; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 12:27:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from SRS0=OkgR=IU=klop.ws=ronald-lists@realworks.nl) Received: from smtp-relay-int.realworks.nl (smtp-relay-int.realworks.nl [194.109.157.24]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4T96Wf23tBz4ZLT; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 12:27:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from SRS0=OkgR=IU=klop.ws=ronald-lists@realworks.nl) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 13:27:33 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=klop.ws; s=rw2; t=1704889654; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=gUtdUZglcdXuxjli1fQr/XAFNVqevgWr1qdVpPDkoiE=; b=F/s4W9yewdRuU2XUlPnLRxxhzxKwEDKdXkkwymjCV8b4DK4WIuyEgBzJWH5usCBMC9xnBK ks4X9v6PK4SwazAc4tH0gMwf4EOD2CIS9sXcoDOJe3rnpDmVP0JSSehfdo+DclpcqHEEj2 KTikvNgQpQizdxW8mQkMQQzQ8DEdpCDKfD4XXfxEBN2jiJkN2avFKwLHFKFcAx0OgePHzt xFaA1JdjYOEQ66Ukk/jhld8PuCfVJu0kabOGcAJRrEVy+nlPyKQaL8+aaj1/9N5ggDSrtz Uef8bVvxaoi2POR5DopYy4CXydNl9z6SMPqNBILVblgdh+j9jixM5uBlkDTgYA== From: Ronald Klop To: Olivier Certner Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Warner Losh Message-ID: <1115024984.4580.1704889653735@localhost> In-Reply-To: <1749331.ETpRK2a2Mi@ravel> References: <20240109174318.MCIB6yhn@steffen%sdaoden.eu> <1749331.ETpRK2a2Mi@ravel> Subject: Re: noatime on ufs2 List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_4579_969573456.1704889653729" X-Mailer: Realworks (684.61) Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4T96Wf23tBz4ZLT X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:3265, ipnet:194.109.0.0/16, country:NL] ------=_Part_4579_969573456.1704889653729 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Van: Olivier Certner Datum: woensdag, 10 januari 2024 11:01 Aan: Warner Losh CC: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Onderwerp: Re: noatime on ufs2 > > Hi Warner, > > > It has also been used for almost as long to see if log files have changed > > if you set your MAIL variable to that. So not just for email... > > This seems to be an example in point of a "niche" scenario, both in terms of spread of usage (even then) and the fact that it's easy to get the functionality by other means. > > Again, I'm not opposing anyone from working on "relatime" if they personally have a strong need and motivation. I'm not even asking for removing the "atime" functionality, which can have its uses. > > What I'm saying is that, based on others' input so far, my own (long, even if not as long as yours) experience and some late reflection, is that "noatime" should be the default (everywhere, all mounts and all FSes), and that working on "relatime" won't make any real difference for most users (IOW, I think that developing "relatime" is a bad idea *in general*). And I think this is a sufficiently reasonable conclusion that anyone with the same inputs would conclude the same. So, if it's not the case, I would be interested in knowing why, ideally. > > Regards. > > -- > Olivier Certner > > > > "And I think this is a sufficiently reasonable conclusion that anyone with the same inputs would conclude the same." This is an interesting type of argument. Ronald. ------=_Part_4579_969573456.1704889653729 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Van: Olivier Certner <olce@freebsd.org>
Datum: woensdag, 10 januari 2024 11:01
Aan: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
CC: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Onderwerp: Re: noatime on ufs2

Hi Warner,

> It has also been used for almost as long to see if log files have changed
> if you set your MAIL variable to that. So not just for email...

This seems to be an example in point of a "niche" scenario, both in terms of spread of usage (even then) and the fact that it's easy to get the functionality by other means.

Again, I'm not opposing anyone from working on "relatime" if they personally have a strong need and motivation.  I'm not even asking for removing the "atime" functionality, which can have its uses.

What I'm saying is that, based on others' input so far, my own (long, even if not as long as yours) experience and some late reflection, is that "noatime" should be the default (everywhere, all mounts and all FSes), and that working on "relatime" won't make any real difference for most users (IOW, I think that developing "relatime" is a bad idea *in general*).  And I think this is a sufficiently reasonable conclusion that anyone with the same inputs would conclude the same.  So, if it's not the case, I would be interested in knowing why, ideally.

Regards.

-- 
Olivier Certner
 


"And I think this is a sufficiently reasonable conclusion that anyone with the same inputs would conclude the same."

This is an interesting type of argument.

Ronald.
  ------=_Part_4579_969573456.1704889653729--