[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Disabling atime

Miloslav Trmac wrote:
Rahul Sundaram napsal(a):
Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 09:43:18PM +0000, Martin Ebourne wrote:
The minority here is having atime, hardly anyone ever uses it
compared to the cost of having it. It's easy to reenable it for the
few who really find it useful and want to pay for it.
tmpwatch runs by default. Everyone uses that.
Has a simple patch already which I mentioned in my original mail.
The patch changes behavior.

We're not in that much of a rush, are we?  Why don't we wait to see
what, if any, relatime variant is committed to the upstream kernel?
relatime design decisions will happen on lkml, not on this list.

This is not the first time these discussions have happened. Not a question of rush but one of finally making a decision. In the same lkml thread I see the redirection to fedora-devel list and I made no attempt to discussion the design here. If relatime is what we want, lets switch to that by default.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]