linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/23] per device dirty throttling -v8

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070809062511.GA23435@capsaicin.mamane.lu>
Date:	Thu, 9 Aug 2007 08:25:11 +0200
From:	Lionel Elie Mamane <lionel@...ane.lu>
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, yingcha@...p.vs19.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/23] per device dirty throttling -v8

On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 06:37:33PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

>> The fact is, ext3 *sucks* at fsync. I hate hate hate it. It's
>> totally unusable, imnsho.

> 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 (...). So for most file workloads we give Windows a
> 20%-30% performance edge, for almost nothing.

It has been years since I used MS Windows much, but from my memories
of my these days, I was under the impression that it (at least the NT
line, the only surviving line these days) also maintained "last
accessed" times. Except I only ever saw it at "right now" because the
file explorer ... accesses the file before getting this metadata or
something like that (when you right-click on a file and ask for its
properties). It has creation and last modification time, too.

So, if my memories are correct, there is no performance edge to be
conceded by having atime (but one to be gained by not having atime).

-- 
Lionel
-
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/