xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Valid Benchmark Value & Methods

To: Dewangga <dewanggaba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Valid Benchmark Value & Methods
From: Martin Steigerwald <martin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 07 May 2015 15:54:06 +0200
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <554B5782.4040303@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <554B4B59.6000706@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <2204700.QypQcg3ER3@merkaba> <554B5782.4040303@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: KMail/4.14.7 (Linux/4.0.1-tp520-btrfs-trim-norace+; KDE/4.14.2; x86_64; git-38b5d90; 2015-04-16)
Am Donnerstag, 7. Mai 2015, 19:16:02 schrieb Dewangga:
> Hello Martin,
> Thanks for your reply, yes I've read that link, but another question,
> is noatime,nodiratime,etc still valid for performance tuning guidance?
> Even the default mount options only "rw,inode64,seclabel,attr2".
> 
> Is it still increase the performance if the additional mount options
> added?

noatime implies nodiratime as far as I know.

And yes, it can help for databases for example. I think official 
recommendation for MySQL and PostgreSQL is to use noatime. There is a post 
by Theodore T´so somewhere about make clean workload on Ext4 with noatime, 
relatime and strictatime handling and only noatime considerably reduced the 
amount of writes.

noatime is a generic tuning option which can help with other filesystems as 
well.

-- 
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA  B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>