Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: Unresponiveness of 2.4.16 revisited | From | "Nathan G. Grennan" <> | Date | 29 Nov 2001 03:07:00 -0600 |
| |
On Thu, 2001-11-29 at 02:14, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > If you can generate hard numbers (just time the RP command, for a start) > and they show regression, then go ahead and post! > > Let's put the atime thing down as a known ext3 problem for a > while. (does it happen with ext2? You sure?). > > Running noatime won't hurt a thing. It just prevents the kernel > from recording when a file was last accessed, within the file's > inode. It's a feature whichis used by backup/archiving programs, > and probably by mailbox monitoring programs (xbiff, etc). People > turn it off all the time...
ok, I doubled checked things. It seems mounting an ext3 filesystem as ext2 is somewhat a myth. If the kernel supports ext3 it still mounts it as ext3 even if /etc/fstab says ext2. When I tried 2.4.16 with ext3 support, but with the journal exactly removed to make it a ext2 filesystem the --rebuild worked just like it does in 2.4.9-13. So it does seem to be a problem with just ext3, and I guess they changed the journaling of atimes between the version in 2.4.9-13 and 2.4.16. It all now makes sense. Thank you for your help.
As for my comment before and Rik's VM vs AA's VM on cache agressiveness, it looks like I was off. It just seems to vary on some dynamic. I thought I checked them at the same points after boot, but between different boots seemed to get different results, who knows.
- 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/
|  |