Does a typical single-user desktop Linux system have apps requiring atime?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I've just:
Does using noatime on modern Linux make sense?
and I'm interpreting the answer there as follows: "If you don't have applications that depend on atime's being valid, you don't need them."
Thinking about my home Linux system, which doesn't serve much of anything to anyone (and I don't use a local MUA, not that I'm aware of anyway), it seems to me like I can safely set noatime
(and nodiratime
). But maybe I'm wrong? Do some typically-installed apps use it still? I'm having doubts about this since I don't see why anyone would expect the OS to maintain atimes for everything just so that it can know the atime for a few files of its own.
files filesystems email atime
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I've just:
Does using noatime on modern Linux make sense?
and I'm interpreting the answer there as follows: "If you don't have applications that depend on atime's being valid, you don't need them."
Thinking about my home Linux system, which doesn't serve much of anything to anyone (and I don't use a local MUA, not that I'm aware of anyway), it seems to me like I can safely set noatime
(and nodiratime
). But maybe I'm wrong? Do some typically-installed apps use it still? I'm having doubts about this since I don't see why anyone would expect the OS to maintain atimes for everything just so that it can know the atime for a few files of its own.
files filesystems email atime
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I've just:
Does using noatime on modern Linux make sense?
and I'm interpreting the answer there as follows: "If you don't have applications that depend on atime's being valid, you don't need them."
Thinking about my home Linux system, which doesn't serve much of anything to anyone (and I don't use a local MUA, not that I'm aware of anyway), it seems to me like I can safely set noatime
(and nodiratime
). But maybe I'm wrong? Do some typically-installed apps use it still? I'm having doubts about this since I don't see why anyone would expect the OS to maintain atimes for everything just so that it can know the atime for a few files of its own.
files filesystems email atime
I've just:
Does using noatime on modern Linux make sense?
and I'm interpreting the answer there as follows: "If you don't have applications that depend on atime's being valid, you don't need them."
Thinking about my home Linux system, which doesn't serve much of anything to anyone (and I don't use a local MUA, not that I'm aware of anyway), it seems to me like I can safely set noatime
(and nodiratime
). But maybe I'm wrong? Do some typically-installed apps use it still? I'm having doubts about this since I don't see why anyone would expect the OS to maintain atimes for everything just so that it can know the atime for a few files of its own.
files filesystems email atime
asked Dec 25 '17 at 10:16
einpoklum
1,93941846
1,93941846
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
Pragmatic answer: just use relatime
- that way you don't have to know or care whether any apps you use rely on atime or not, and you won't risk breaking something that does rely on it that you forgot/didn't know about.
With relatime
, the atime of a file/dir will be updated only if it has been modified since it was last read, giving all the benefits of atime without the performance penalty.
BTW, two of the most common uses for atime are MUAs (which you know about) and some programs/scripts that process files in an "incoming" queue check if the queue directory has been modified since it was last read (i.e. mtime > atime) to figure out whether there is any new work to do.
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
Pragmatic answer: just use relatime
- that way you don't have to know or care whether any apps you use rely on atime or not, and you won't risk breaking something that does rely on it that you forgot/didn't know about.
With relatime
, the atime of a file/dir will be updated only if it has been modified since it was last read, giving all the benefits of atime without the performance penalty.
BTW, two of the most common uses for atime are MUAs (which you know about) and some programs/scripts that process files in an "incoming" queue check if the queue directory has been modified since it was last read (i.e. mtime > atime) to figure out whether there is any new work to do.
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
Pragmatic answer: just use relatime
- that way you don't have to know or care whether any apps you use rely on atime or not, and you won't risk breaking something that does rely on it that you forgot/didn't know about.
With relatime
, the atime of a file/dir will be updated only if it has been modified since it was last read, giving all the benefits of atime without the performance penalty.
BTW, two of the most common uses for atime are MUAs (which you know about) and some programs/scripts that process files in an "incoming" queue check if the queue directory has been modified since it was last read (i.e. mtime > atime) to figure out whether there is any new work to do.
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
Pragmatic answer: just use relatime
- that way you don't have to know or care whether any apps you use rely on atime or not, and you won't risk breaking something that does rely on it that you forgot/didn't know about.
With relatime
, the atime of a file/dir will be updated only if it has been modified since it was last read, giving all the benefits of atime without the performance penalty.
BTW, two of the most common uses for atime are MUAs (which you know about) and some programs/scripts that process files in an "incoming" queue check if the queue directory has been modified since it was last read (i.e. mtime > atime) to figure out whether there is any new work to do.
Pragmatic answer: just use relatime
- that way you don't have to know or care whether any apps you use rely on atime or not, and you won't risk breaking something that does rely on it that you forgot/didn't know about.
With relatime
, the atime of a file/dir will be updated only if it has been modified since it was last read, giving all the benefits of atime without the performance penalty.
BTW, two of the most common uses for atime are MUAs (which you know about) and some programs/scripts that process files in an "incoming" queue check if the queue directory has been modified since it was last read (i.e. mtime > atime) to figure out whether there is any new work to do.
edited Dec 25 '17 at 11:40
answered Dec 25 '17 at 11:35
cas
37.7k44394
37.7k44394
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f412929%2fdoes-a-typical-single-user-desktop-linux-system-have-apps-requiring-atime%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password