[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20060805122537.GA23239@lst.de>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2006 14:25:37 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Valerie Henson <val_henson@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Akkana Peck <akkana@...llowsky.com>,
Mark Fasheh <mark.fasheh@...cle.com>,
Jesse Barnes <jesse.barnes@...el.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
Chris Wedgwood <cw@...f.org>, jsipek@...sunysb.edu,
Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Relative lazy atime
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 11:36:22PM -0700, Valerie Henson wrote:
> (Corrected Chris Wedgwood's name and email.)
>
> My friend Akkana followed my advice to use noatime on one of her
> machines, but discovered that mutt was unusable because it always
> thought that new messages had arrived since the last time it had
> checked a folder (mbox format). I thought this was a bummer, so I
> wrote a "relative lazy atime" patch which only updates the atime if
> the old atime was less than the ctime or mtime. This is not the same
> as the lazy atime patch of yore[1], which maintained a list of inodes
> with dirty atimes and wrote them out on unmount.
Another idea, similar to how atime updates work in xfs currently might
be interesting: Always update atime in core, but don't start a
transaction just for it - instead only flush it when you'd do it anyway,
that is another transaction or evicting the inode.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists