Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 19:16:51 +0900 From: Takeshi Yamada <ken@tydfam.machida.tokyo.jp> To: rb@gid.co.uk Cc: julian@whistle.com, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Soft update vs noatime Message-ID: <19980516191651U.ken@ns1.tydfam.machida.tokyo.jp> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 16 May 1998 10:42:50 %2B0100" <l03020900b1830fcf8550@[194.32.164.2]> References: <l03020900b1830fcf8550@[194.32.164.2]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
From: Bob Bishop <rb@gid.co.uk> Subject: Soft update vs noatime : : : rb> Is there any reason not to use noatime with soft updates? Yes, I do without any problem. I am running X-3.3.2, kde, xemacs, netscape 4.05, 3 kterms in which at least two makes are running at the same time. And some files are NFS'ed. This is my typical usage, and for these three days I have no problem at all so far. I am using P6@200Mhz x 1(ASUS P6NP5), 128MBDRAM, 4GBSCSI, and I softupdate /var, /home and /usr. Thanks to Julian. 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?19980516191651U.ken>