On 6/10/11, Steven Tardy <sjt5 at its.msstate.edu> wrote: > did you set noatime on the host filesystem and/or the VM filesystem? > i would think noatime on the VM would provide more benefit than on the > host... > shrug. now my brain hurts. gee thanks. (: I was trying it on the host first, thinking that would cut down on half the writes since the host wouldn't have to update the atime everytime the diskfiles are accessed. But now that you brought it up, I'm wondering if that would had been pointless. If the kernel considers KVM opening the diskfile and holding onto it as a single access, regardless of how many subsequent reads/writes there are, then this wouldn't make a difference would it?