[Box Backup] noatime for this?

[Peter Jalajas, TebucoSafe Backups]

--- Martin Ebourne <lists at ebourne.me.uk> wrote:

> On Mon, 2007-10-08 at 09:38 -0700, Peter Jalajas, TebucoSafe Backups
> wrote:
> > Instigated by news of Con Kolivas' departure from the Linux kernel team
> 
> Unfortunately he was never really part of the "team", which was a lot of
> the problem.

Ah, yes, thanks, Martin.

> > , I am exploring ways to
> > speed up my perceived desktop performance (currently on Ubuntu, but open to other
> suggestions),
> > and somehow noticed this recent article: 
> >
>
http://rudd-o.com/archives/2007/10/02/tales-from-responsivenessland-why-linux-feels-slow-and-how-to-fix-that/
> > which suggests adding ",noatime" to disk mount options, and which eventually led to this one:

Actually, a typo on my part: that rudd-o.com article above doesn't mention noatime, but the
lwn.net one below does.  Sorry for any confusion.

> > http://lwn.net/Articles/244829/
> > which duly warns that some applications need noatime.  
> > 
> > Does Box Backup client or server need noatime or any of the other options mentioned in that
> last
> > article?
> 
> noatime does not adversely affect Box Backup. I've run with noatime set
> on all my filesystems on all my machines since back in the late 90s.
> Quite frankly I think you'd have to be mad not to, and I find it
> disappointing that more distros don't use it as a default, since for 99%
> of users it's the right thing.

Awesome, great to hear, thanks again.  Yes, the noatime default is a very interesting issue (as
are the swappiness and cache defaults).  

Pete