From nobody Thu Jan 11 00:49:55 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-current@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4T9R0K1v9Tz56cfk for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 00:50:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net) Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net [65.75.216.6]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4T9R0J3xZWz4LwV; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 00:50:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id 40B0nuKJ046905; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 16:49:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd-rwg@localhost) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id 40B0ntj0046904; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 16:49:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <202401110049.40B0ntj0046904@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: noatime on ufs2 In-Reply-To: To: Mark Millard Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 16:49:55 -0800 (PST) CC: olce@FreeBSD.org, Current FreeBSD X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL121h (25)] List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4T9R0J3xZWz4LwV X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:10494, ipnet:65.75.216.0/23, country:US] > Olivier Certner wrote on > Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 10:01:48 UTC : > > > What I'm saying is that, based on others' input so far, my own (long, even if not as long as yours) experience and some late reflection, is that "noatime" should be the default (everywhere, all mounts and all FSes), and that working on "relatime" won't make any real difference for most users (IOW, I think that developing "relatime" is a bad idea *in general*). And I think this is a sufficiently reasonable conclusion that anyone with the same inputs would conclude the same. So, if it's not the case, I would be interested in knowing why, ideally. > > I never use atime, always noatime, for UFS. That said, I'd never propose > changing the long standing defaults for commands and calls. I'd avoid: ... Very well said Mark ... Please folks stop tweaking defaults, especially long standing ones, if you feel the need for noatime, set it, by all means, I have been for 30 years.... ... what Mark said very well removed for brevity ... > Mark Millard > marklmi at yahoo.com -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org