On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 09:49:39AM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> > How about somethign like "This mount significantly reduces writes
> > needed to update the inode's timestamps, especially mtime and actime.
>
> What is "actime" in the preceding line? Should it be "ctime"?
Sorry, no, it should be "atime".
> I find the wording of there a little confusing. Is the following
> a correct rewrite:
>
> 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.)
Yes, that's correct. The only other thing I might add is that in the
case of a crash, the atime (or mtime) fields on disk might be out of
date by at most 24 hours.
- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
