Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 31 Jan 2002 19:19:02 +0100
From:      Roman Neuhauser <neuhauser@mobil.cz>
To:        questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: noatime switch on local mount - anything really need the atime field ?
Message-ID:  <20020131191902.P68986@roman.mobil.cz>
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20020131112513.00aa6c20@postoffice.swbell.net>
References:  <5.1.0.14.0.20020131112513.00aa6c20@postoffice.swbell.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 11:36:48 -0600
> To: questions@freebsd.org
> From: Sean O'Neill <sean@seanoneill.info>
> Subject: noatime switch on local mount - anything really need the atime
>   field ?
> 
> Does anything really use the atime field of inodes?
> 
> Reading that atime update really isn't that big of a hit for casual systems 
> (expect for make world stuff) like mine but hey, never hurts to get a 
> little more performance out of my box :)

    MUAs use atime of mbox-type mailboxes to be able to tell whether new
    mail has arrived. (Properly working MDA doesn't update atime when
    storing a message in an mbox-type mailbox. MUA then sees mtime >
    atime, and marks the mailbox as having new mail.)

-- 
FreeBSD 4.4-STABLE
7:16PM up 11 days, 1:39, 21 users, load averages: 0.04, 0.05, 0.05

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020131191902.P68986>