| To: | Utako Kusaka <u-kusaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH, RFC] Re: atime not written to disk |
| From: | Niv Sardi <xaiki@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 23 Oct 2008 13:53:23 +1100 |
| Cc: | Timothy Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>, xfs <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20081022081710.GL18495@disturbed> (Dave Chinner's message of "Wed, 22 Oct 2008 19:17:10 +1100") |
| References: | <48FD74CC.907@sgi.com> <48FD7B69.3090600@wm.jp.nec.com> <20081022081710.GL18495@disturbed> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.0.60 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) |
Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: [...] > As I mentioned on IRC, Tim, the following patch fixes the above test > case. It will make XFS behave like other filesystems w.r.t. atime, > instead of defaulting to relatime-like behaviour. This will have > performance impact unless ppl now add the relatime mount option. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I don't really like it, and don't think there is a real justification to do it. Why not only do: |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH, RFC] Re: atime not written to disk, Niv Sardi |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: crash with latest code drop., Peter Leckie |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH, RFC] Re: atime not written to disk, Niv Sardi |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH, RFC] Re: atime not written to disk, Dave Chinner |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |