From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Aug 29 07:35:57 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 319E316A41A; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 07:35:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marck@rinet.ru) Received: from woozle.rinet.ru (woozle.rinet.ru [195.54.192.68]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC04813C45B; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 07:35:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marck@rinet.ru) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by woozle.rinet.ru (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7T7ZouL037805; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:35:50 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from marck@rinet.ru) Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:35:50 +0400 (MSD) From: Dmitry Morozovsky To: Pawel Jakub Dawidek In-Reply-To: <20070828175402.GB39562@garage.freebsd.pl> Message-ID: <20070829113209.C1528@woozle.rinet.ru> References: <46D2C812.8090106@gmail.com> <20070828104625.GB36596@garage.freebsd.pl> <46D40833.2030007@barafranca.com> <20070828175402.GB39562@garage.freebsd.pl> X-NCC-RegID: ru.rinet X-OpenPGP-Key-ID: 6B691B03 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (woozle.rinet.ru [0.0.0.0]); Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:35:50 +0400 (MSD) Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Hugo Silva Subject: Re: Encrypted zfs? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 07:35:57 -0000 On Tue, 28 Aug 2007, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: PJD> On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 12:34:11PM +0100, Hugo Silva wrote: PJD> > How's the performance on the geli-backed pool ? PJD> PJD> It depends a lot on CPU speed, but you should be ready for visible PJD> performance drop. I'll give you two examples: [examples snipped] PJD> But don't you worry, when you must have encryption, you don't really PJD> care about performance. And when you decided not to use encryption, PJD> because it introduces too big overhead, it only means that you didn't PJD> need encryption in the first place:) Well, I suppose most usage patterns imply that only part of data really needs encryption (as only part really needs copies>1 or compression), hence it would be *extremely* useful if one can ``zfs set encryption=on tank/home/joe'' (could it be done via pluggable geom modules or something?) Sincerely, D.Marck [DM5020, MCK-RIPE, DM3-RIPN] [ FreeBSD committer: marck@FreeBSD.org ] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *** Dmitry Morozovsky --- D.Marck --- Wild Woozle --- marck@rinet.ru *** ------------------------------------------------------------------------