On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 11:01:41AM -0800, Ray Van Dolson wrote: > On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 07:41:13PM +0100, Diego Calleja wrote: > > On Miércoles, 5 de Enero de 2011 18:42:42 Gordan Bobic escribió: > > > So by doing the hash indexing offline, the total amount of disk I/O > > > required effectively doubles, and the amount of CPU spent on doing the > > > hashing is in no way reduced. > > > > But there are people who might want to avoid temporally the extra cost > > of online dedup, and do it offline when the server load is smaller. > > > > In my opinion, both online and offline dedup have valid use cases, and > > the best choice is probably implement both. > > Question from an end-user. When we say "offline" deduplication, are we > talking about post-process deduplication (a la what Data ONTAP does > with their SIS implementation) during which the underlying file system > data continues to be available, or a process that needs exclusive > access ot the blocks to do its job? >
Yeah its just a post-process thing, you run it when you care to run it and it doesn't make anything unavailable. Thanks, Josef -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
