Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 08:18:10 -0700 From: Don Lewis <Don.Lewis@tsc.tdk.com> To: Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Softupdates panics Message-ID: <199809261518.IAA00908@salsa.gv.tsc.tdk.com> In-Reply-To: Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr> "Re: Softupdates panics" (Sep 26, 1:00pm)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sep 26, 1:00pm, Ollivier Robert wrote: } Subject: Re: Softupdates panics } According to Kevin Street: } > added `noatime' to two of my heavily used softupdates slices in } } noatime with SU is a known Bad Thing[tm]. I hadn't heard this. I don't know why that would be true. } We should probably refuse to use } bth at the same time. noatime seems to be unnecessary with SU anyway. If you are reading lots of files and writing lots of files on the same disk, it would seem to improve performance if you avoiding writing back the inodes of files that had only been read. If you are only reading files on the filesystem, I don't see where softupdates buys you any performance increase, whereas noatime does. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199809261518.IAA00908>