On 07/29/1999 11:18 -0400, Jan Edler wrote:
>> I don't buy this; the atime updates should be subject to caching,
>> and not get written to the disk more than the update daemon
>> (kflushd or whatever) forces.
>>
True, if there are a small number of accesses, but I have seen
many cases (for example running 'find . -whatever' on a large
file system consisting primarily of many small files) where there
are sufficient accesses going on to keep kflushd/update/whatever
busy enough to actually impact read performance. Granted, that
may not be everyone's usual case, but it does happen. This is
one of the reasons I will personally not recommend putting a
very busy news server on RAID5 - the expires can easily kill
a machine.
tw
--
+------------------------------+--------------------------+
| Tim Walberg | Phone: 847-782-2472 |
| TERAbridge Technologies Corp | FAX: 847-623-1717 |
| 1375 Tri-State Parkway | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
| Gurnee, IL 60031 | 800-SKY-TEL2 PIN 9353299 |
+------------------------------+--------------------------+
PGP signature
