noatime on ssd drives fstab
Hello,
I have been reading about putting noatime in the fstab on ssd drives. Is it a good thing to do? My system has the first drive is an ssd where the system lives and the second drive is just an "normal rotating hard drive". cheers |
yes, usually it is suggested
|
Always add noatime, except to your mail servers cache partition.
noatime is an option that reduces un-needed writes and cuts write overhead for ANY drive. With SSD it may also extend the life of the drive. There are certain applications that make use of atime values (certain mail programs), but if you are not running one of those it will never have a negative impact.
If you use the mutt mail client, you might want to put your mail folder on the rotational drive and allow atime values to be used there. The compromise solution is to use 'reltime' mount option for volumes where atime should be used, but reduced writes are desired. |
Hello NigelC,
To take what you have done a couple of steps further in terms of reducing write overhead on the SSD, you could: Split the mechanical drive into 4 partitions 1. Move the swap partition to partition 1 of 4 on the mechanical drive. - SWAP parition 2. Move the mail files /var/spool/mail? as suggested by "wpeckham" to partition 2 of 4 on the mechanical drive - EXT4 partition 3. Move the log files /var/log to partition 3 of 4 on the mechanical drive - EXT4 partition 4. Set partition 4 of 4 to be your data partition - EXT4 partition. By combining all of the above the no. of write cycles especially regarding the log files would be greatly reduced. The downside being that you lose some of the performance benefits for purchasing the SSD in the first place... The positive being that if your Linux install dies you still have a copy of your mail / log / data files. Regards, Rawcous |
Member response
Hi,
Modern SSD do not have the same issues with write as older SSD technologies. Newer SSD have better controllers and use 'MLC' for most consumer grade drives. To me 2 million hours is an long period for a life of the drive to expect any errors or any at all. I as a user will replace the hardware system before any failures due to write issue for cells. You could spend more for 'SLC' based SSD but for consumer usage it would be a big dent in the wallet and over-kill. I have been using 'SSD' on all my systems and do not have issues with any since the systems are properly configured. As a informed consumer a user should read manufacture data/specs instead of relying on 'FUD'. One of my systems with a Crucial SSD; Code:
cat /etc/fstab I do use different manufactures but find ocz a good bang for the buck. Prices are falling daily, I use NewEgg all the time. A recent OCZ purchase, look at the specs & price for a 240GB SSD. Hope this helps. Have fun & enjoy! :hattip: |
Hello,
I have kind of already adopted "OneBuck"'s philisophy reagrding modern SSD's in that although I have moved swap, log and mail to another physical device - I must confess that this other physical device I have used here is in fact, yes you've got it - another SSD. I simply like to keep my data according to type on separate partitions as per "OneBuck"'s dump of his /etc/fstab file. I am no longer going to obsess about the no. of write cycles etc. and simply enjoy the benefits of the purchase - speed / reliabilty etc. Regards, Rawcous |
I had thought that atime was deprecated and relatime preferred, where needed? I seem to recall Linux suggested that relatime be the default, has this not happened yet?
Personally, though, I use noatime on my home system as I don't need atime so don't want the, admittedly probably negligible, write overhead. |
Hi,
This is how it is at the moment. The system does use not any swap as there is 24 Gig of Ram. Code:
cat /etc/fstab |
It does not work??
Here is the new fstab:
Code:
cat /etc/fstab Code:
mount |grep /dev/sda1 |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:13 AM. |