Bad file access on the rise

[Roberto Ragusa]

On 06/08/2013 04:13 PM, Doug Ledford wrote:
> 
> Yes, but none of these results show the .12s time that your first
> noatime test run showed in your original post.  If you are now saying
> that atime is faster than noatime by about .005 to .010s, then these
> results seem to show that.  But your original post was from .019 to .12,
> or a difference of .10+s.  That was cache load time, not just the
> syscall difference.

Hmm, someone is misreading the results.
I've reread multiple times, and I see a difference of 12s, not .12s.

---> real	0m12.645s
---> user	0m0.003s
---> sys	0m0.159s

And 12 seconds (elapsed, with 0.159s system) means 12s/5000=2.4ms
which could only be explained with the auditing system doing fsync
calls on its log files.

-- 
   Roberto Ragusa    mail at robertoragusa.it