Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 24 Aug 2023 14:08:19 +0200
From:      infoomatic <infoomatic@gmx.at>
To:        Dewayne <dewayne@heuristicsystems.com.au>, questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Is ZFS native encryption safe to use?
Message-ID:  <6b741e03-732e-f1b8-6340-0a8897fb8235@gmx.at>
In-Reply-To: <f286ee12-8688-9a16-2c5e-e11fda8334f7@heuristicsystems.com.au>
References:  <NcUuVT_--3-9@tutanota.com> <0e7d2657-f857-01a8-f764-33b9c62c11f1@netfence.it> <de460855-d2a8-3125-1b64-bf5052e1e6ea@gmx.at> <f286ee12-8688-9a16-2c5e-e11fda8334f7@heuristicsystems.com.au>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 24.08.23 00:43, Dewayne wrote:
> Thx for the performance hint.=C2=A0 Were you using the same cipher on ea=
ch?

Yes, I have tried various combinations, but the difference was so huge
that I did not let the benchmarks finish cause I felt it was wasted time
and resources!


> On 23/08/2023 5:34 pm, infoomatic wrote:
>> last time (when 13.0 was released) I compared them:
>>
>> *) GELI + normal zfs was significantly faster than encrypted-zfs
>> *) encrypted zfs to share files between Linux and FreeBSD did not work
>> properly, resulting in Files non-readable on FreeBSD
>>



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6b741e03-732e-f1b8-6340-0a8897fb8235>