Re: BTRFS, relatime vs. noatime

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

 



On 2020-09-06 01:35, Chris Murphy wrote:

I figured nothing was using it these days and it was a complete waste. If tracker uses atime, maybe I'll get more worried. But if it uses mtime, I'm not.


I've found atime useful in several cases. If you are doubting about a configuration file being
read or not by an application, you just check the atime before and after running it
(way easier than strace). If you are investigating what a suspect script or confused user
has just done, you can find for recent atime.

After it took years to go back from noatime to a weak relatime, we are now going to
lose it completely again.

Did any filesystem developer ever think about storing atime in a different way, instead
of usual inode metadata? Maybe a dedicated journal of overriding atime entries
(column based DB vs inode's row based DB) to cope with "access many files"
patterns.

And what happened to "lazytime"? It sounded like a great approach.

Regards.

--
   Roberto Ragusa    mail at robertoragusa.it
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux