3 ms·

From a file system design perspective, does anyone know why ZFS chose to use block clones, instead of file clones?

by throwaway2037 2y ago

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
raattgift 2y ago
Records (which are of variable size) are already checksummed, and there were checksum-hashes which made it vanishingly unlikely that one could choose two different records with the same (optionally cryptographically strong) checksum-hash. When a newly-created record's checksum is generated, one could look into a table of existing checksum-hashes and avoid the record write if it already exists, substituting an incremented refcount for that table entry. ZFS is essentially an object store database at one layer; the checksum-hash deduplication table is an object like any other (file, metadata, bookmarks, ...). There is one deduplication table per pool, shared among all its datasets/volumes. On reads, one does not have to consult the dedup table. The mechanism was fairly easy to add. And for highly-deduplicatable data that is streaming-write-once-into-quiescent-pool-and-never-modify-or-delete-what's-written-into-a-deduplicated-dataset-or-volume, it was a reasonable mechanism. In other applications, the deduplication table would tend to grow and spread out, requiring extra seeks for practically every new write into a deduplicated dataset or volume, even if it's just to increment or decrement the refcount for a record. Destroying a deduplicated dataset has to decrement all its refcounts (and remove entries from the table where it's the only reference), and if your table cannot all fit in ram, the additional IOPS onto spinning media hurt, often very badly. People experimenting with deduplication and who wanted to back out after running into performance issues for typical workloads sometimes determined it was much MUCH faster to destroy the entire pool and restore from backups, rather than wait for a "zfs destroy" on a set of deduplicated snapshots/datasets/volumes to complete.
mbreese 2y ago
I have no specialized knowledge (just a ZFS user for over a decade). I suspect the reason is that in addition to files, ZFS will also allow you to create volumes. These volumes act like block devices, so if you want to dedup them, you need to do it at the block level.

From a file system design perspective, does anyone know why ZFS chose to use block clones, instead of file clones?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

Records (which are of variable size) are already checksummed, and there were checksum-hashes which made it vanishingly unlikely that one could choose two different records with the same (optionally cryptographically strong) checksum-hash. When a newly-created record's checksum is generated, one could look into a table of existing checksum-hashes and avoid the record write if it already exists, substituting an incremented refcount for that table entry. ZFS is essentially an object store database at one layer; the checksum-hash deduplication table is an object like any other (file, metadata, bookmarks, ...). There is one deduplication table per pool, shared among all its datasets/volumes. On reads, one does not have to consult the dedup table. The mechanism was fairly easy to add. And for highly-deduplicatable data that is streaming-write-once-into-quiescent-pool-and-never-modify-or-delete-what's-written-into-a-deduplicated-dataset-or-volume, it was a reasonable mechanism. In other applications, the deduplication table would tend to grow and spread out, requiring extra seeks for practically every new write into a deduplicated dataset or volume, even if it's just to increment or decrement the refcount for a record. Destroying a deduplicated dataset has to decrement all its refcounts (and remove entries from the table where it's the only reference), and if your table cannot all fit in ram, the additional IOPS onto spinning media hurt, often very badly. People experimenting with deduplication and who wanted to back out after running into performance issues for typical workloads sometimes determined it was much MUCH faster to destroy the entire pool and restore from backups, rather than wait for a "zfs destroy" on a set of deduplicated snapshots/datasets/volumes to complete.

mbreese 2y ago

I have no specialized knowledge (just a ZFS user for over a decade). I suspect the reason is that in addition to files, ZFS will also allow you to create volumes. These volumes act like block devices, so if you want to dedup them, you need to do it at the block level.