| To: | AndyLiebman@xxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: noatime |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 30 Jan 2004 17:57:56 +0000 |
| Cc: | ewwhite@xxxxxxx, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <115.2e2700bf.2d4bf471@aol.com>; from AndyLiebman@aol.com on Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 12:54:57PM -0500 |
| References: | <115.2e2700bf.2d4bf471@aol.com> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.2.5.1i |
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 12:54:57PM -0500, AndyLiebman@xxxxxxx wrote: > Just a follow up. Is there any danger/disadvantage in using "noatime" on a > big RAID array with critical data on it? Does it somehow prejudice the > recovery > from an unexpected shut down or crash? Or is "atime" just pretty much useless > information for most people? There's no data-integrity issues, but there's certain applications that rely on atime information. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: noatime, AndyLiebman |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | TAKE 908648 - Fix gcc 3.5 compilation for real, Christoph Hellwig |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: noatime, AndyLiebman |
| Next by Thread: | Re: noatime, Robert Brockway |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |