Re: noatime on ufs2
- Reply: Warner Losh : "Re: noatime on ufs2"
- Reply: Olivier Certner : "Re: noatime on ufs2"
- In reply to: Miroslav Lachman : "Re: noatime on ufs2"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 13:58:56 UTC
On 11 Jan 2024, at 7:30, Miroslav Lachman wrote: > On 11/01/2024 09:54, Tomoaki AOKI wrote: >> On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 08:36:24 +0100 >> Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> wrote: > > [..] > >>> There's one possibility which nobody talked about yet... changing the >>> default to noatime at install time in fstab / zfs set. >>> >>> I fully agree to not violate POLA by changing the default to noatime in >>> any FS. I always set noatime everywhere on systems I take care about, no >>> exceptions (any user visible mail is handled via maildir/IMAP, not >>> mbox). I haven't made up my mind if it would be a good idea to change >>> bsdinstall to set noatime (after asking the user about it, and later >>> maybe offer the possibility to use relatime in case it gets >>> implemented). I think it is at least worthwile to discuss this >>> possibility (including what the default setting of bsdinstall should be >>> for this option). > > [..] > >> A different aspect of view. >> Nowadays, storages are quickly moving from HDD, aka spinning rust, to >> SSD. >> And SSD has a risk of sudden-death of wearing out. In ancient days, HDD >> dies not suddenly and at least some cases admins could have time to >> replace suspicious drives. But SSD dies basically suddenly. >> >> IMHO, this could be a valid reason to violate POLA. In limited use >> cases, atime is useful, at the cost of amplified write accesses. >> But in most cases, it doesn't have positive functionality nowadays. >> >> Anyway, we should have time to discuss whether it should be done or not >> until upcoming stable/15 branch. stable/14 is already here and it >> wouldn't be a good thing to MFC. Only *.0-RELEASE should be the point >> to introduce this, unlike discussion about vi and ee on forums. > > The default values change over time as the needs of people, programs and hardware change. Many values for sysctls changed over time. > If "noatime" can help people to not trash SSD / SD storage, I can imagine that bsdinstall will detect the storage type (simple guess can be made by diskinfo -v) and offer a "noatime" option that the user can check/uncheck. This option can be pre-selected for flash based storage. > I don't care defaults for my-self, I can change them, but sane defaults should be beneficial for new users without much background knowledge. > > Kind regards > Miroslav Lachman I like the idea of an option in bsdinstall, but I don't think it is necessary to check the storage type. It could simply default to noatime. I think we should automatically use noatime on SD card images (where bsdinstall doesn't get used). Separately, I think a relatime option would be a good compromise, and I would probably use it. Mike