Jan Kara wrote: >> In looking at what we have today, I wonder if we can make things smarter >> so that we don't commit empty transactions in any case? > Probably it does not make sence to commit such transactions and we might > save some time in sync paths if we do so. So yes, I think skipping empty > transaction commit might be worthwhile and it shouldn't be hard to do > either. But I'd give it serious testing just in case some unexpectedly > relies on this behaviour - wouldn't this interfere e.g. with sync > transaction batching autotuning code? Untested patch below... > Honza Cool, thanks! This's stop: # sync from spinning up disks under idle filesystems too, I think. I was looking at something similar but was still working out how many things to check before deciding if the transaction was in fact empty. :) -Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
