From owner-freebsd-current Sat May 16 12:11:47 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA22796 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Sat, 16 May 1998 12:11:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from alpo.whistle.com (alpo.whistle.com [207.76.204.38]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA22771 for ; Sat, 16 May 1998 12:11:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from julian@whistle.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by alpo.whistle.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id MAA24534; Sat, 16 May 1998 12:07:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from current1.whistle.com(207.76.205.22) via SMTP by alpo.whistle.com, id smtpd024531; Sat May 16 19:07:02 1998 Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 12:06:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer To: Eivind Eklund cc: Bob Bishop , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Soft update vs noatime In-Reply-To: <19980516123741.53851@follo.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG you're confusing noatime and async.. On Sat, 16 May 1998, Eivind Eklund wrote: > On Sat, May 16, 1998 at 10:42:50AM +0100, Bob Bishop wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Is there any reason not to use noatime with soft updates? > > Previously it changed some graphs, which broke soft updates. I don't > know if that is fixed - personally, I'm not certain it need to be > fixed, as writing the atime should be much less noticable with soft > updates. We will of course need to deny noatime on a soft updated > filesystem > > Eivind. > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message