Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Relative lazy atime
From: Dave Kleikamp
Date: Wed Aug 09 2006 - 08:56:07 EST
On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 14:21 +0200, Jörn Engel wrote:
> 1. standard
> Every read access to a file/directory causes an atime update.
> 2. nodiratime
> Every read access to a non-directory causes an atime update.
> 3. lazy atime
> The first read access to a file/directory causes an atime update.
> 4. noatime
> No read access to a file/directory causes an atime update.
> In comparison, lazy atime will cause more atime updates for
> directories and vastly fewer for non-directories.
Using nodiratime and lazy atime together would probably be the best
option for those that only want atime for mutt/shell mail notification.
> Effectively atime
> is turned into little more than a flag, stating whether the file was
> ever read since the last write to it. And it appears as if neither
> mutt nor the shell use atime for more than this flagging purpose, so I
> am rather fond of the idea.
IBM Linux Technology Center
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/