You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In Filecoin, deals are natural shards. Deals are considered self contained and atomic. The client cannot rely on any deduplication happening across deals. Deal-mapped shards can be deleted when the deal has expired with no risk at all.
However, in IPFS things are different. IPFS conceives all data to be on the same level, and there are no protocol units that could map to shards. However, the DAG store can be a true game-changer for IPFS, since there is really no requirement nor benefit in using a fully-fledged storage engine to store IPFS data.
Storage engines map poorly to DAG data. DAG data needs to be stored in a modular way. When users add content, they are likely adding meaningful chunks of them that correspond to files, directories, archives, sub-DAGs, etc. Users don't add random, disparate blocks to their local IPFS data. So why treat all blocks as equal (which is what a storage engine does)?
Moreover, users are likely to want to manage the data by dealing with the "meaningful chunks" themselves. Users will want to remove/drop/erase sub-DAGs corresponding to directories, files, etc. When using a storage engine, since blocks are deduplicated, one needs to implement costly refcounting GC algorithms (example, there are many threads and initiatives around IPFS GC) to identify blocks that can be effectively deleted.
That is then coupled with finding ways to forcefully reclaim physical space from the storage engine, which is likely to add tombstone entries but not necessarily release space immediately, as it likely needs to run compactions or other housekeeping processes to integrate the deletes and free up the space.
In a DAG-store world, it would be fairly easy to delete an entire shard. Other operations require shard arithmetic:
deleting partial content from a shard
deleting content across many shards
combining shards
deduplicating content across shards
denormalising content across shards
In the DAG store, shards are immutable. These operations are performed by creating new shards, or reassigning mounts to existing shards. By using mmap and shard indices, one can efficiently perform these joins, splits, regroupings, etc.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
In Filecoin, deals are natural shards. Deals are considered self contained and atomic. The client cannot rely on any deduplication happening across deals. Deal-mapped shards can be deleted when the deal has expired with no risk at all.
However, in IPFS things are different. IPFS conceives all data to be on the same level, and there are no protocol units that could map to shards. However, the DAG store can be a true game-changer for IPFS, since there is really no requirement nor benefit in using a fully-fledged storage engine to store IPFS data.
Storage engines map poorly to DAG data. DAG data needs to be stored in a modular way. When users add content, they are likely adding meaningful chunks of them that correspond to files, directories, archives, sub-DAGs, etc. Users don't add random, disparate blocks to their local IPFS data. So why treat all blocks as equal (which is what a storage engine does)?
Moreover, users are likely to want to manage the data by dealing with the "meaningful chunks" themselves. Users will want to remove/drop/erase sub-DAGs corresponding to directories, files, etc. When using a storage engine, since blocks are deduplicated, one needs to implement costly refcounting GC algorithms (example, there are many threads and initiatives around IPFS GC) to identify blocks that can be effectively deleted.
That is then coupled with finding ways to forcefully reclaim physical space from the storage engine, which is likely to add tombstone entries but not necessarily release space immediately, as it likely needs to run compactions or other housekeeping processes to integrate the deletes and free up the space.
In a DAG-store world, it would be fairly easy to delete an entire shard. Other operations require shard arithmetic:
In the DAG store, shards are immutable. These operations are performed by creating new shards, or reassigning mounts to existing shards. By using mmap and shard indices, one can efficiently perform these joins, splits, regroupings, etc.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: