From owner-freebsd-current Sat May 16 03:21:57 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA22763 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Sat, 16 May 1998 03:21:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from mailer.tydfam.machida.tokyo.jp (ns.tydfam.machida.tokyo.jp [210.161.209.130]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id DAA22758 for ; Sat, 16 May 1998 03:21:54 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ken@tydfam.machida.tokyo.jp) Received: from localhost (ns1.tydfam.machida.tokyo.jp [210.161.209.138]) by mailer.tydfam.machida.tokyo.jp (8.8.8/3.6W) with ESMTP id TAA15273; Sat, 16 May 1998 19:16:52 +0900 (JST) To: rb@gid.co.uk Cc: julian@whistle.com, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Soft update vs noatime Reply-To: ken@tydfam.machida.tokyo.jp In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 16 May 1998 10:42:50 +0100" References: X-Mailer: Mew version 1.93b1 on XEmacs 20.3 (Vatican City) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19980516191651U.ken@ns1.tydfam.machida.tokyo.jp> Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 19:16:51 +0900 From: Takeshi Yamada X-Dispatcher: imput version 971024 Lines: 16 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG From: Bob Bishop 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