[Bug 7249] Add an option to use O_NOATIME

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7249 --- Comment #17 from Wayne Davison --- I just tweaked the option name to --open-noatime, which I think is clearer. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug. -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid

[Bug 7249] Add an option to use O_NOATIME

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7249 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug 7249] Add an option to use O_NOATIME

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7249 --- Comment #15 from Michal Ruprich --- Thanks Samuel, now I can enable tests during build in Fedora and keep the noatime option as well. Still though, it would be good to have upstream approval on this :/ -- You are receiving this mail because:

[Bug 7249] Add an option to use O_NOATIME

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7249 Samuel Henrique changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #15524|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug 7249] Add an option to use O_NOATIME

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7249 --- Comment #13 from Samuel Henrique --- Created attachment 15524 --> https://bugzilla.samba.org/attachment.cgi?id=15524=edit Adds --noatime option for 3.1.3 Updated the patch to fix "make test" with the help of Paul Slootman. I'm happy to say

[Bug 7249] Add an option to use O_NOATIME

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7249 --- Comment #12 from Samuel Henrique --- The patch is currently introducing a regression on the target "test" (make test). /usr/bin/ld: syscall.o: in function `do_open': ./syscall.c:206: undefined reference to `noatime' It happens when the target

[Bug 7249] Add an option to use O_NOATIME

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7249 --- Comment #11 from Samuel Henrique --- This patch has been being applied to the Debian packaging of rsync since 2014 (5 years now). As Michal Ruprich said, this patch requires the build to be made in a certain way as it can lead to undefined

[Bug 7249] Add an option to use O_NOATIME

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7249 --- Comment #10 from Michal Ruprich --- Hi, I think that ideally you should decide what to do with this. This almost 10 years old bug is still here and it seems no one from the rsync developers paid any attention to this. If you are not planning

[Bug 7249] Add an option to use O_NOATIME

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7249 --- Comment #9 from Michal Ruprich --- Did any of you who uses rsync with noatime patch had problems with running 'make check' command? It seems to me that some of the source files might be compiling in different order than

[Bug 7249] Add an option to use O_NOATIME

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7249 --- Comment #8 from Michal Ruprich --- Is there any update on this feature? Is there a plan to merge the patch into master branch of rsync? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug. --

[Bug 7249] Add an option to use O_NOATIME

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7249 --- Comment #7 from cyril...@gmail.com --- +1 I'm currently using a locally patched version, because I'm using rsync to mirror my whole data daily, plus using a deduplicating backup tool weekly that stores atime (so if rsync sets atime, the metadata

Re: O_NOATIME ?

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 11:46:50AM +0200, Paul Slootman wrote: > Most filesystems on modern linux systems should be mounted with the > relatime option. This is the default... > You can also use noatime as a mount option, but then be sure that no > application uses the atimes of files; e.g.

Re: O_NOATIME ?

On Wed 26 Oct 2016, devz...@web.de wrote: > > since we are using rsync for backing up millions of files in a virtual > environment, and most of the virtual machines run on SSD cached storage, i`d > be curious how that negatively impacts lifetime of the SSD`s when we do rsync > run every night

O_NOATIME ?

file comparison run to determine if anything has changed change atime of any files ? for me it seems, stat/lstat calls of rsync do NOT modify atime, but i`m not sure under which conditions atime is changed. grepping the source for O_NOATIME in rsync3.txt i found : - Propagate atimes and do

[Bug 7249] Add an option to use O_NOATIME

things like moving a directory tree to a new place (file system, machine), or copying/sync'ing it to a back-up location, and later restoring the originals, without the user of those files being able to discern any differences in them. I built rsync with Nicolas George's O_NOATIME patch on the latest

[Bug 7249] Add an option to use O_NOATIME

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7249 Martin von Gagern martin.vgag...@gmx.net changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #9278||review?

[Bug 7249] Add an option to use O_NOATIME

and do not modify them. This is very ugly on Unix. It might be better to try to add O_NOATIME to kernels, and call that. So apparently someone with commit privileges (Martin Pool to be precise) already has decided that such a feature would be desirable (back in 2001). Does this add weight

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 7249] Add an option to use O_NOATIME

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7249 devz...@web.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||devz...@web.de --- Comment #2 from

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 7249] Add an option to use O_NOATIME

. It only works if the O_NOATIME flags exists on that particular platform but has no other drawbacks. AFAIK, the patch on rsync-patches.git explicitly puts back the atime to what it was. It has the drawback of updating the ctime instead. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org

O_NOATIME in linux 2.6.8rc2

linux 2.6.8rc2 gained an O_NOATIME open option, which allows you to make backups without affecting the atime. Someone might like to add this into rsync as an option. It should be pretty trivial. -- Martin pgpOjwszIPU8F.pgp Description: PGP signature -- To unsubscribe or change options: http