From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 10 23:00:54 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9AAE16A41A for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 23:00:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bv@bilver.wjv.com) Received: from wjv.com (fl-65-40-24-38.sta.embarqhsd.net [65.40.24.38]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 921F213C459 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 23:00:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bv@bilver.wjv.com) Received: from bilver.wjv.com (localhost.wjv.com [127.0.0.1]) by wjv.com (8.14.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l8AN0UDw092308; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 19:00:30 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from bv@bilver.wjv.com) Received: (from bv@localhost) by bilver.wjv.com (8.14.1/8.13.1/Submit) id l8AN0O9u092307; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 19:00:24 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from bv) Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 19:00:24 -0400 From: Bill Vermillion To: Craig Boston , Gore Jarold , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20070910230024.GA92246@wjv.com> References: <704329.73647.qm@web63015.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <20070910215812.GB10142@nowhere> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070910215812.GB10142@nowhere> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Organization: W.J.Vermillion / Orlando - Winter Park ReplyTo: bv@wjv.com Cc: Subject: Re: noatime on / and /var too ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: bv@wjv.com List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 23:00:54 -0000 On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 16:58 Craig Boston saw "Error reading FAT table? Try SKINNY table?" And promptly said: > On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 03:17:09PM -0700, Gore Jarold wrote: > > I know it won't change much since they are not busy > > filesystems, but if there is no risk and no "best > > practices" reason _not_ to do it, I might as well... > I always set noatime on everything for years now and have never > run into any problems with it. > Unless you're specifically using atime for something (I think > some news server software may use it), I can't think of a good > reason to leave it enabled. > Craig I've not seen news software use that by default, but I do definately run no atime on my news server. Even though it's small adding 100s to 1000s each day and expiring each night make it really un-neccesary to retain the atimes on those. I'd say that anything that gets a lot of access to many files, and there is no modification to those - archival files, web files, etc - that would be a good reason to turn on atime IMO. I only use it on user file systems and not on / or /var. Bill -- Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com