From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@matchmail.com>
Subject: Re: ext3 file system
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 00:39:57 -0800
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Message-ID: <20031218083957.GA6438@matchmail.com>
References: <3FE23273@webmail.colostate.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner+linux-kernel=40quimby.gnus.org@vger.kernel.org>
To: jshankar <jshankar@CS.ColoState.EDU>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3FE23273@webmail.colostate.edu>
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 09:47:59PM -0700, jshankar wrote:
> Hello Hans,
> 
> >Filesystems don't usually wait on the IO to complete before submitting
> >more IO in response to the next write() syscall.  They can do this by
> >batching a whole bunch of operations into one committed transaction.
> >
> 
> Is there a timeout mechanism for batching operations. What if certain 
> operation
> is done after the batch operation is executed. Does it mean that the new 
> operation has to wait.

You don't have to wait unless you run out of available non-dirty memory, or
issue a call to sync to the disks.