![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
* Diego Calleja <diegocg@gmail.com> wrote: > > Measurements show that noatime helps 20-30% on regular desktop > > workloads, easily 50% for kernel builds and much more than that (in > > excess of 100%) for file-read-intense workloads. We cannot just walk > > And as everybody knows in servers is a popular practice to disable it. > According to an interview to the kernel.org admins.... yeah - but i'd be surprised if more than 1% of all Linux servers out there had noatime. > "Beyond that, Peter noted, "very little fancy is going on, and that is > good because fancy is hard to maintain." He explained that the only > fancy thing being done is that all filesystems are mounted noatime > meaning that the system doesn't have to make writes to the filesystem > for files which are simply being read, "that cut the load average in > half." nice quote :-) > I bet that some people would consider such performance hit a bug... yeah. Ingo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2007-08-06 07:01 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||