User talk:Neognomic

From ArchWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search


If you don't specify any *atime option and a lazytime option, it means that relatime is applied as per the default. Hence the last paragraph in this section.

Regarding Mutt, see my previous edit. Regarding style generally, don't mix it with the fundamental changes – see ArchWiki:Contributing#The 3 fundamental rules.

-- Lahwaacz (talk) 19:48, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Lahwaacz: You keep saying that about lazytime but you never provide any proof. Prove what you say is true. ...

Maybe YOU should read this again: ArchWiki:Contributing#The 3 fundamental rules You had no right whatsoever to remove all of my (minor) edits for atime subsection.

TBH, the only reason this subsection of atime got attention is that it did not have lazytime listed which was a huge mistake. Somebody, you I suppose, was not paying attention. So instead of saying 'thanks for catching that', you wasted HOURS of my time with this ridiculous back and forth nonsense while still not providing one single shred of evidence that the man 8 mount page is wrong.

It will be one cold day in Hell before I ever help Arch linux again. -- Neognomic (talk) 02:00, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

The mount(2) man page says (in the "Additional mount flags" section under MS_LAZYTIME):
Examples of workloads where this option could be of significant benefit include frequent random writes to preallocated files, as well as cases where the MS_STRICTATIME mount option is also enabled. (The advantage of combining MS_STRICTATIME and MS_LAZYTIME is that stat(2) will return the correctly updated atime, but the atime updates will be flushed to disk only in the cases listed above.)
-- Lahwaacz (talk) 07:42, 8 August 2016 (UTC)