Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 03 Mar 2005 13:18:45 +0100
From:      "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
To:        ticso@cicely.de
Cc:        hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: FUD about CGD and GBDE 
Message-ID:  <7153.1109852325@critter.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 03 Mar 2005 13:04:22 %2B0100." <20050303120421.GW86348@cicely12.cicely.de> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20050303120421.GW86348@cicely12.cicely.de>, Bernd Walter writes:

>No matter what disk you take - writes never have been atomic.
>The major difference I see is that you get a read error back in
>the disk failure case, while such a crypto failure produces more or
>less random data without any error.
>Mounting unclean filesystems rw for bg_fsck can be considered
>dangerous with such unexpected data corruption.
>And how would you know that a restore from backup is required for
>a damaged file?

100% true.

The trouble is that it would cost a lot in performance and a doubling
in metadata to protect yourself against this.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?7153.1109852325>