Super User is a question and answer site for computer enthusiasts and power users. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

mount -o remount,ro,noatime

As the title says - if the filesystem is actually read-only, does noatime have any affect?

share|improve this question

Short answer: No.

If the filesystem is mounted read-only, then the kernel module should be sufficiently smart to not even think about writing atime entries for accessed files, because that would constitute a ... write, which is verboten by the read-only status.

share|improve this answer

No, read only means read only, if you told it to not write to it it will not write access times to it.

For more information, see man fstab.

share|improve this answer
I see, if you do not mind me asking - source on that? – gng Oct 20 '11 at 11:19
My experience :-) No, really: ro means NO writes at all. Everything else may safely considered as bug. – ktf Oct 20 '11 at 11:23
I'm not sure about that. It might that VFS handles noatime somehow different. A little bit of google search shows lots of people using both at the same time, but I couldn't get any source about why doing it or not, neihter in the man pages. – Jens Erat Oct 20 '11 at 11:53
On my system the man page stated ro means "read-only" (phew, lucky me). Adding noatime to ro helps as much as finger-crossing: Will do no harm! – ktf Oct 20 '11 at 13:05

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .