Re: Transparent compression in the FS

[jlnance]

On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 06:47:15PM -0700, Eric Sandall wrote:

> It doesn't really matter that the hash collision is /less/ likely to ruin data
> than something in hardware as it adds an /extra/ layer of possible corruption,
> so you have a net gain in the possible corruption of your data.  Now, if you
> could write it so that there was /no/ possibility of data corruption, than it
> would be much more acceptable as it wouldn't add any extra likeliness of
> corruption than already exists.

This assumes that the probability of there being a bug in the code which
checks for identical blocks is less than the probability of a hash collision.
I am not sure that is a good assumption.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/