On 02/27/2015 06:51 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 09:01:10AM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> On 02/27/2015 01:04 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 02:36:33PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
The disadvantage of MS_STRICTA
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 09:01:10AM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> On 02/27/2015 01:04 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 02:36:33PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> >>
> >> The disadvantage of MS_STRICTATIME | MS_LAZYTIME is that
> >> in the case of
With Omar's suggestions, this looks great.
Thanks!!
- 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
Hello Omar,
On 02/27/2015 09:08 AM, Omar Sandoval wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 09:01:10AM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> On 02/27/2015 01:04 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 02:36:33PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
The disadvantage of
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 09:01:10AM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> On 02/27/2015 01:04 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 02:36:33PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> >>
> >> The disadvantage of MS_STRICTATIME | MS_LAZYTIME is that
> >> in the case of
On 02/27/2015 01:04 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 02:36:33PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>
>> The disadvantage of MS_STRICTATIME | MS_LAZYTIME is that
>> in the case of a system crash, the atime and mtime fields
>> on disk might be out of date by at m
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 02:36:33PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>
> The disadvantage of MS_STRICTATIME | MS_LAZYTIME is that
> in the case of a system crash, the atime and mtime fields
> on disk might be out of date by at most 24 hours.
I'd change to "The disadvantage of
On 02/26/2015 02:31 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> 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 p
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,
On 02/23/2015 05:24 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 2/23/15 6:20 AM, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote:
>> On 2015-02-20 21:56, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 09:49:34AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>This mount option significantly reduces writes to the
>
Ted,
On 02/21/2015 03:56 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 09:49:34AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>
>>> This mount option significantly reduces writes to the
>>> inode table for workloads that perform frequent random
>>> writes to pre
On 2/23/15 6:20 AM, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote:
> On 2015-02-20 21:56, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 09:49:34AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>>
This mount option significantly reduces writes to the
inode table for workloads that perform f
On 2015-02-20 21:56, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 09:49:34AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
This mount option significantly reduces writes to the
inode table for workloads that perform frequent random
writes to preallocated files.
On 02/20/2015 12:50 AM, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
* As at Linux 3.20, this option is supported only on ext4.
"As of Linux 3.20" is more correct.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordo
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 09:49:34AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>
> > This mount option significantly reduces writes to the
> > inode table for workloads that perform frequent random
> > writes to preallocated files.
>
> This seems like an overly speci
On 02/20/2015 04:49 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 2/20/15 2:50 AM, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
>> Hello Ted,
>>
>> Based on your commit message 0ae45f63d4e, I I wrote the documentation
>> below for MS_LAZYTIME, to go into the mount(2) man page. Could you
>> please check it over and let me know if it's ac
On 2/20/15 2:50 AM, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
> Hello Ted,
>
> Based on your commit message 0ae45f63d4e, I I wrote the documentation
> below for MS_LAZYTIME, to go into the mount(2) man page. Could you
> please check it over and let me know if it's accurate. In particular,
> I added pieces marked wit
On 20 February 2015 at 13:32, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Feb 20, 2015, at 1:50 AM, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
>>
>> Hello Ted,
>>
>> Based on your commit message 0ae45f63d4e, I I wrote the documentation
>> below for MS_LAZYTIME, to go into the mount(2) man page. Could you
>> please check it over and
On Feb 20, 2015, at 1:50 AM, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
>
> Hello Ted,
>
> Based on your commit message 0ae45f63d4e, I I wrote the documentation
> below for MS_LAZYTIME, to go into the mount(2) man page. Could you
> please check it over and let me know if it's accurate. In particular,
> I added piec
Hello Ted,
Based on your commit message 0ae45f63d4e, I I wrote the documentation
below for MS_LAZYTIME, to go into the mount(2) man page. Could you
please check it over and let me know if it's accurate. In particular,
I added pieces marked with "*" below that were not part of the commit
message an
20 matches
Mail list logo
