[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <p73hcnen7w2.fsf@bingen.suse.de>
Date: 05 Aug 2007 02:26:53 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, miklos@...redi.hu,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, neilb@...e.de, dgc@....com,
tomoki.sekiyama.qu@...achi.com, nikita@...sterfs.com,
trond.myklebust@....uio.no, yingchao.zhou@...il.com,
richard@....demon.co.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/23] per device dirty throttling -v8
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> writes:
>
> yeah, it's really ugly. But otherwise i've got no real complaint about
> ext3 - with the obligatory qualification that "noatime,nodiratime" in
> /etc/fstab is a must. This speeds up things very visibly - especially
> when lots of files are accessed. It's kind of weird that every Linux
> desktop and server is hurt by a noticeable IO performance slowdown due
> to the constant atime updates, while there's just two real users of it:
> tmpwatch [which can be configured to use ctime so it's not a big issue]
> and some backup tools. (Ok, and mail-notify too i guess.) Out of tens of
> thousands of applications. So for most file workloads we give Windows a
> 20%-30% performance edge, for almost nothing. (for RAM-starved kernel
> builds the performance difference between atime and noatime+nodiratime
> setups is more on the order of 40%)
I always thought the right solution would be to just sync atime only
very very lazily. This means if a inode is only dirty because of an
atime update put it on a "only write out when there is nothing to do
or the memory is really needed" list.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists