Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 13:59:54 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Cc: dg@root.com, terry@lambert.org, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, henrich@crh.cl.msu.edu Subject: Re: mount -o async on a news servre Message-ID: <199701132059.NAA28218@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199701130626.RAA07882@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from "Bruce Evans" at Jan 13, 97 05:26:31 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > The two options are complimentary. i.e., "async" will get you fast file > >creates/deletes, but it doesn't stop the access time from being updated - it > >just delays it until the inode buffer needs to be reclaimed. "noatime" doesn't > > Access times are never written to disk immediately when nothing else changes, > except for utimes() on some file systems including ufs. "Shall be marked for update". The question for the rest of it is "does 'shall be updated' mean 'shall be written to disk'"? ...most FS designers I've talked to say "no". Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199701132059.NAA28218>