archzfs VS xxHash

# This installs ZFS from the AUR by default. I now use archzfs. It must be setup first. # https://github.com/archzfs/archzfs/wiki paru -S archiso zfs-dkms zfs-utils qemu edk2-ovmf

Just want to add, I didn't have any of these problems using archzfs instead of the AUR packages.

https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/zfs-linux and archzfs.com both get you back to https://github.com/archzfs/archzfs/wiki - have a look at the maintainers name: minextu. So both, the AUR as well as the pacman repo, contain both the very same packages as their storage backend is the same.

Since it's a full kernel why are there issues like this https://github.com/archzfs/archzfs/issues/393? Why would it matter that upstream kernel is newer than archzfs package, how would that break anything?

Which packages are you using? Initcpio hook in AUR zfs-utils doesn't support encrypted root, use archzfs repo.

I watch the aur/zfs-dkms comments and check in on the archzfs github/issues.

No, my information is not outdated. Whether you are getting a package from AUR or from some unofficial repo that you add to your standard repositories doesn't matter. It is still unoffial and if you look at the actual packages in that archzfs repository you will see that the only packages in there are the kernels: https://github.com/archzfs/archzfs/tree/master/packages

I tried reading zfs-utils mkinitcpio/hooks/zfs, and it looks like it mounts child datasets of root and legacy datasets only.

> GPU Hash Table?

How bad would performance have suffered if you sha256'd the lines to build the map? I'm going to guess "badly"?

Maybe something like this in CUDA: https://github.com/Cyan4973/xxHash ?

Examples of fast, simple hashes that are independent enough includes murmur, xxHash, Fowler–Noll–Vo hash function and many others

If you're only using the hash for non-cryptographic applications, there are much faster hashes: https://github.com/Cyan4973/xxHash

I found the benchmark result of AMD ryzen 5950X

But what's the catch, you're thinking ? Well, it is a bit slower than its counterparts when it comes to deserializing (and marginally faster for serializing). To achieve smaller footprint, it uses a few tricks and notably a custom hash table to deduplicate strings. This comes at a cost of course (even when featuring xxHash to speed things up), but keeps the slowdown reasonable (I think).

Non cryptographic hashes has collisions, for example, assume you having content like "abcdefg" which hashed value is "123", in case of weak hash algorithm some other content like "abcdefZ" can also have a hash "123" which basically means such hash function is failed to be unique fingerprint of particular content. BLAKE3 for example can do 6-7Gb/s which make it pretty fast and secure. If your requirement accepts collision with defined error rate, I would advise you to take a look at XXH3 if you need very snappy hash algorithm, which can run at pace or RAM access (30GB/s+), but again, run tests at particular equipment you targeting, may be AES hardware accelerated MeowHash will serve you better.