Keep in mind ZFS was created at a time when disks were glacial in comparison to CPUs. And, the fastest write is the one you don't perform, so you can afford some CPU time to check for duplicate blocks.
That said, NVMe has changed that balance a lot, and you can afford a lot less before you're bottlenecking the drives.
If the block to be written is already being stored then you will match the hash and the block won't have to be written. This can save a lot of write IO in real world use.
Yes, but doing it intentionally isn't as simple as one might think. First, BGP generally prefers the shortest path and yours is going to be a little long, so unless the best original path is very long you need on some transit provider to use policy-based routing and trust you as transit. Second, if you want the traffic to pass through your hardware you have to have sufficient bandwidth, otherwise you'll just trigger packet loss and disrupt service (fine if disruption is your goal, not so fine if you want the traffic to pass through your hardware). Third, some people use signed routes, which also complicates your job.
> First, BGP generally prefers the shortest path and yours is going to be a little long, so unless the best original path is very long you need on some transit provider to use policy-based routing and trust you as transit.
the article states:
> The leaked route is likely preferable because of a localpref setting which would prefer sending traffic for free through a peer regardless of the AS path length, over paying to send traffic through a transit provider.
Right. That's policy routing. You can talk to an ISP, have a cable installed and a peering session, gain trust, offer cheap or free traffic delivery, and then publish a route via that session. Your trusting peer may/will then send traffic to that route via you.
This happens legitimately, e.g. when an end-user becomes multihomed or starts using anycast, so the trusting peer can't necessarily discover this algorithmically. Route signing helps.
That's one trick part of the the question (a common trick, a lot of people don't read two "the"s in a row), but the other answer could be "what you read in the triangle below" as that's what the question states.
The other trick is that the line could be too short depending on your handwriting, in theory disqualifying the tested person regardless of what they write down.
And the person who answered wrote the last two words such that they're not "on the line provided", so regardless of which phrase they're supposed to write, they got the question wrong.
Assuming they did write the correct thing, and assuming the test administrator would be unusually generous about the placement of the words, they still got it wrong: they left off the colon at the end.
