> The problem is that to set a bound on the size of wapbl transactions, > deleting an inode truncates it -- and commits the truncation to the > journal -- one indirect block at a time, even if the file is sparse in > which case most such truncations don't actually do anything. (The file is not sparse, btw) Yes, but half a minute of CPU time? That's a 2.7GHz Opteron, not an RPI.
> There's a patch floating around to ascertain how much space is left in > the current transaction and truncate as many blocks as will fit in it > at a time. The machine in question is running 6.1.