9fans - fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Russ Cox <rsc@swtch.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Subject: Re: [9fans] thoughs about venti+fossil
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 15:46:35 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CADSkJJXZx1cBw8kpu+idR0E7H1o8CBWUDMoeGLmVpygNCvgbeg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5536975a.l8Wm63exg0ejuKfK%hruodr@gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1951 bytes --]

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 2:30 PM, <hruodr@gmail.com> wrote:

> Does this mean, that Plan9 by default supposes that A=B if hash(A)=hash(B)?
>

Yes.


> That this was not the default before, but it is now?
>

Yes.


> That I still have the possibility of a "full check" of A=B (and not
> supposing
> it after checking hash(A)=hash(B)) by changing "int verifywrites = 1;" in
> "lump.c"?
>

Yes.


> I just want to know why the
> default was changed,


I believe I changed it, because I was working on performance, and reading
data from disk to run a memcmp whose answer is already known is an obvious
operation to cut to make a disk-bound server faster. Since you (quite
reasonably) don't want to reopen the debate over whether that's a
reasonable optimization, I won't justify it further.

My paper with Sean Rhea and Alex Pesterev documents the performance effect
of double-checking the equality in some detail.
https://www.usenix.org/legacy/event/usenix08/tech/full_papers/rhea/rhea.pdf.
(Caveat: in the usual academic tradition, the paper uses "Venti" to mean
the system described in the original paper, not the system in Plan 9 today.
The current Plan 9 implementation is much closer to what the paper calls
"Foundation: Compare by Hash".)


> why originaly A=B was checked even if one was sure
> that the probability of error by only checking hash(A)=hash(B) is
> negligible, why the possibility of changing this default exists.
>

I didn't write the original code, so I can't answer that definitively. That
said, it seems to me quite reasonable to check A=B in the initial version
of a server, since you might have bugs in your implementation such that
(for example) hash(x) = 0 for all x. Once the system is more stable it also
seems to me reasonable to remove those checks if they incur significant
cost, much as one turns off costly asserts or other debugging code.

Hope this helps.
Russ

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3344 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2015-04-21 19:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 67+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-04-21 18:30 hruodr
2015-04-21 19:46 ` Russ Cox [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-04-23  7:21 hruodr
2008-03-06 19:09 Brian L. Stuart
2008-03-06 19:50 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-03-05 14:03 erik quanstrom
2008-03-05 16:00 ` Russ Cox
2008-03-05  4:00 Enrico Weigelt
2008-03-05  4:11 ` Roman Shaposhnik
2008-03-05  4:43   ` erik quanstrom
2008-03-05  5:09     ` Roman Shaposhnik
2008-03-05  5:52   ` Enrico Weigelt
2008-03-05  6:24     ` geoff
2008-03-05  6:35     ` Taj Khattra
     [not found]     ` <7f575fa27b41329b9ae24f40e6e5a3cd@plan9.bell-labs.com>
2008-03-06  4:04       ` Enrico Weigelt
2008-03-06  4:13         ` Bruce Ellis
2008-03-06  4:15         ` andrey mirtchovski
2008-03-06  4:31           ` Bruce Ellis
2008-03-06  6:16             ` Enrico Weigelt
2008-03-06 18:50               ` ron minnich
2008-03-06 19:43                 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-03-06 19:45               ` Paul Lalonde
2008-03-06 20:18                 ` Bruce Ellis
2008-03-06 21:39                   ` Paul Lalonde
2008-03-08  9:06                     ` Enrico Weigelt
2008-03-06 22:10                   ` Martin Harriss
2008-03-06  6:40           ` Enrico Weigelt
2008-03-06 14:35             ` erik quanstrom
2008-03-06 14:58             ` Tom Lieber
2008-03-06 15:09             ` Charles Forsyth
2008-03-06 17:09               ` Robert Raschke
2008-03-10 10:19               ` sqweek
2008-03-10 12:29                 ` Gorka Guardiola
2008-03-10 13:20                 ` erik quanstrom
2008-03-10 19:00                   ` Wes Kussmaul
2008-03-10 19:27                     ` erik quanstrom
2008-03-10 20:55                       ` Bakul Shah
2008-03-11  2:04                       ` Wes Kussmaul
2008-03-11  2:10                         ` erik quanstrom
2008-03-11  6:03                           ` Bruce Ellis
2008-03-10 16:18                 ` Russ Cox
2008-03-10 18:06                   ` Bruce Ellis
2008-03-10 18:31                     ` Eric Van Hensbergen
2008-03-10 18:40                       ` Bruce Ellis
2008-03-10 18:46                     ` Geoffrey Avila
2008-03-10 20:28                       ` Charles Forsyth
2008-03-10 21:35                     ` Charles Forsyth
2008-03-06  9:54           ` Wilhelm B. Kloke
2008-03-08  9:37             ` Enrico Weigelt
2008-03-08  9:57               ` Bruce Ellis
2008-03-08 10:46               ` Charles Forsyth
2008-03-08 15:37               ` erik quanstrom
2008-03-06  4:40         ` cummij
2008-03-06  5:15           ` Bruce Ellis
2008-03-06  5:40         ` Uriel
2008-03-06  5:55           ` Bruce Ellis
2008-03-11 18:34             ` Uriel
2008-03-06 12:26           ` erik quanstrom
2008-03-05  5:04 ` geoff
2008-03-05  8:43 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-03-05  9:05   ` Gorka Guardiola
2008-03-05 14:33 ` Russ Cox
2008-03-06 12:39   ` Enrico Weigelt
2008-03-06 16:58     ` Russ Cox
2008-03-06 18:16       ` andrey mirtchovski
     [not found] ` <a553f487750f88281db1cce3378577c7@terzarima.net>
2008-03-06  5:38   ` Enrico Weigelt
2008-03-06  9:44     ` Joel C. Salomon

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=CADSkJJXZx1cBw8kpu+idR0E7H1o8CBWUDMoeGLmVpygNCvgbeg@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=rsc@swtch.com \
    --cc=9fans@9fans.net \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).