lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: Performance of ext3 on large systems
Date
> > Well, yes, but that's not what I was saying - what was saying is that
> > if you are primarily reading anyway, there isn't much to be gained
> > from using EXT-3, over EXT-2.
>
> Besides of data robustness.

Well yes, but that only matters if the filesystem isn't unmounted
cleanly.

> > If you are primarily writing, EXT-3 atime should be faster than EXT-2
> > noatime. EXT-3 notime will obviously be even faster.
>
> No. For primarily writing the 'noatime' effect disappears in background
> noice. Every time you write into file, mtime will be updated, and also
> ctime. Only one of i-node timestamps _not_ updated is atime...

Well, that's what I was implying, that for primarily writing, EXT-3
should be better than EXT-2, regardless of the atime configuration.

So, we agree :-).

John.
-
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: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:0.077 / U:1.060 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site