Re: Performance of ext3 on large systems

[John Bradford <john@grabjohn.com>]

> > Actually, it makes sense in a way - noatime only speeds up reads, not
> > writes, (access time is always updated on a write), whereas a
> > journaled filesystem is presumably intended to be tuned for write
> > performance.  So, for it's intended usage, not implementing noatime
> > shouldn't be a huge problem, although it would be useful.
> 
> But updating the access time _is_ a write, even if its due to a read. 
> And using 'noatime' does help, and it is implemented.  I guess Andrew's
> statement was just misinterpreted, because this is what he said.

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.

If you are primarily writing, EXT-3 atime should be faster than EXT-2
noatime.  EXT-3 notime will obviously be even faster.

John.