From: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
To: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
Cc: <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Online dedup for Btrfs
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2013 11:38:59 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130401153859.GJ1876@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130401125034.GG1876@localhost.localdomain>
On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 08:50:34AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I was bored this weekend so I hacked up online dedup for Btrfs. It's working
> quite well so I think it can be more widely tested. There are two ways to use
> it
>
> 1) Compatible mode - this is a bit slower but will handle being used by older
> kernels. We use the csum tree to find duplicate blocks. Since it is relatively
> easy to have crc32c collisions this also involves reading the block from disk
> and doing a memcmp with the block we want to write to verify it has the same
> data. This is way slow but hey, no incompat flag!
>
> 2) Incompatible mode - so this is the way you probably want to use it if you
> don't care about being able to go back to older kernels. You select your
> hashing function (at the momement I only support sha1 but there is room in the
> format to have different functions). This creates a btree indexed by the hash
> and the bytenr. Then we lookup the hash and just link the extent in if it
> matches the hash. You can use -o paranoid-dedup if you are paranoid about hash
> collisions and this will force it to do the memcmp() dance to make sure that the
> extent we are deduping really matches the extent.
>
> So performance wise obviously the compat mode sucks. It's about 50% slower on
> disk and about 20% slower on my Fusion card. We get pretty good space savings,
> about 10% in my horrible test (just copy a git tree onto the fs), but IMHO not
> worth the performance hit.
>
> The incompat mode is a bit better, only 15% drop on disk and about 10% on my
> fusion card. Closer to the crc numbers if we have -o paranoid-dedup. The space
> savings is better since it uses the original extent sizes, we get about 15%
> space savings. Please feel free to pull and try it, you can get it here
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/josef/btrfs-next.git dedup
>
> Thanks!
>
It's been pointed out to me that this is probably too serious, so just FYI it's
April 1st where I am. Thanks,
Josef
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-01 15:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-01 12:50 [RFC] Online dedup for Btrfs Josef Bacik
2013-04-01 14:44 ` Harald Glatt
2013-04-18 15:07 ` Martin
2013-04-01 15:38 ` Josef Bacik [this message]
2013-04-01 15:50 ` Harald Glatt
2013-04-01 16:16 ` Konstantinos Skarlatos
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130401153859.GJ1876@localhost.localdomain \
--to=jbacik@fusionio.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox