4 ms·
Copy-on-write is not the same thing as content-addressable. ZFS has deduplication as an optional feature, which is implemented as a content-addressable store o
by the_why_of_y 12y ago
Copy-on-write is not the same thing as content-addressable.
ZFS has deduplication as an optional feature, which is implemented as a content-addressable store of filesystem blocks. In contrast to e.g. git the content-addressable aspect is an implementation detail that is not exposed to users.
http://blogs.sun.com/bonwick/entry/zfs_dedup http://blogs.sun.com/bonwick/entry/zfs_dedup
- laumars 12y ago> Copy-on-write is not the same thing as content-addressable. I know that. But CoW does cover a few points raised by the previous poster. > ZFS has deduplication as an optional feature, which is implemented as a content-addressable store of filesystem blocks. In contrast to e.g. git the content-addressable aspect is an implementation detail that is not exposed to users. I know what dedup is and how ZFS utilises it (I've been running ZFS for about 8 years now - I'm quite familiar with it). If you read my post again, you'll see I was discussing two separate points: 1) that CoW file systems do provide the pointer-like methods the former commenter raised. And 2) deduping isn't free. What you're arguing with me is semantics and if you read the former post again, you'll understand why I chose the language I chose.