[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <54F02C73.5090601@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 09:36:03 +0100
From: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
To: Omar Sandoval <osandov@...ndov.com>
CC: mtk.manpages@...il.com, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>, linux-man@...r.kernel.org,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
XFS Developers <xfs@....sgi.com>,
Linux-Fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux btrfs Developers List <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Documenting MS_LAZYTIME
Hello Omar,
On 02/27/2015 09:08 AM, Omar Sandoval wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 09:01:10AM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> On 02/27/2015 01:04 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 02:36:33PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The disadvantage of MS_STRICTATIME | MS_LAZYTIME is that
>>>> in the case of a system crash, the atime and mtime fields
>>>> on disk might be out of date by at most 24 hours.
>>>
>>> I'd change to "The disadvantage of MS_LAZYTIME is that..." and
>>> perhaps move that so it's clear it applies to any use of MS_LAZYTIME
>>> has this as a downside.
>>>
>>> Does that make sense?
>>
>> Thanks, Ted. Got it. So, now we have:
>>
>> MS_LAZYTIME (since Linux 3.20)
>> Reduce on-disk updates of inode timestamps (atime,
>> mtime, ctime) by maintaining these changes only in mem‐
>> ory. The on-disk timestamps are updated only when:
>>
>> (a) the inode needs to be updated for some change unre‐
>> lated to file timestamps;
>>
>> (b) the application employs fsync(2), syncfs(2), or
>> sync(2);
>>
>> (c) an undeleted inode is evicted from memory; or
>>
>> (d) more than 24 hours have passed since the inode was
>> written to disk.
>>
>> This mount significantly reduces writes needed to update
> "This mount option"?
Thanks, fixed.
>> the inode's timestamps, especially mtime and atime.
>> However, in the event of a system crash, the atime and
>> mtime fields on disk might be out of date by up to 24
>> hours.
>>
>> Examples of workloads where this option could be of sig‐
>> nificant benefit include frequent random writes to pre‐
>> allocated files, as well as cases where the MS_STRICTA‐
>> TIME mount option is also enabled. (The advantage of
>> (MS_STRICTATIME | MS_LAZYTIME) is that stat(2) will
>> return the correctly updated atime, but the atime
>> updates will be flushed to disk only when (1) the inode
>> needs to be updated for filesystem / data consistency
>> reasons or (2) the inode is pushed out of memory, or (3)
>> the filesystem is unmounted.)
> Is it necessary to repeat the reasons for flushing, which are stated
> above?
Good point. I replaced this piece with just a few words referring
to the list above.
Thanks,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists