Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 12:06:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com> To: Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no> Cc: Bob Bishop <rb@gid.co.uk>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Soft update vs noatime Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95.980516120647.16642H-100000@current1.whistle.com> In-Reply-To: <19980516123741.53851@follo.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95.980516120647.16642H-100000>