Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:55:38 +0000
From:      RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com>
To:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: freebsd encrypted hard disk?
Message-ID:  <20090114225538.66e001de@gumby.homeunix.com>
In-Reply-To: <20090114175954.GC97086@slackbox.xs4all.nl>
References:  <ab52c4f40901140923k58245c1au2b4a2c89adde90bc@mail.gmail.com> <20090114175954.GC97086@slackbox.xs4all.nl>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:59:54 +0100
Roland Smith <rsmith@xs4all.nl> wrote:

>  Geli is
> convenient and seems to work well. On modern machines the performance
> penalty is slight. It supports well-regarded encryption algorithms
> like AES and Blowfish.

It depends on what you mean by modern, and slight, on my single-core
amd64 2.8G the performance penalty of geli is substantial. Not just in
reduced transfer rates, but also in terms of CPU cycles used - a
sustained geli to geli file copy makes things really slow for me.

I think most people find that filling a disk from /dev/random is slower
than from /dev/null, or it at least has an impact on overall
performance. And the /dev/random generator stage is  AES encryption of
a counter so the performance hit against /dev/null should be similar to
writing to geli (and in my experience it is). And the faster your disks
are, the more cpu speed you need to avoid cpu-limiting.




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090114225538.66e001de>