On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 12:14 -0400, Charles Perreault wrote: > Hello, > > This is just a little update about my JFS corruption problem. After > making a few tests about ecryptfs, I discovered it may not be as > stable as the author claims it to. I'm starting to doubt if it would > not corrupt the underlying filesystem somehow as it hooks calls in the > VFS. I decided to dump it and use the more widely adopted and tested > dm-crypt / cryptsetup. I prefered encryption on a per-file basis as > the cpu is a duron 750mhz, but after testing dm-crypt seems, > surprisingly, to be fast enough. > > So right now, I created a dm-crypt device on top of my mdadm raid 1 > device, and formatted the encrypted device to JFS. Up to now, no new > corruption arised and the system is undergoing heavy stress tests. > It's copying via rsync/rsh about 500 gb of files, then it deletes > everything and starts over. > > I'll keep you informed if new corruption arise. If the filesystem > stays rock solid after two weeks of testing, I'll consider the problem > closed and file a bug request at ecryptfs.
I'm glad I can pass the blame to ecryptfs. :-) I had been under the impression that you were seeing corruption problems prior to running ecryptfs on jfs. Michael Halcrow has recently re-written ecryptfs to be a bit more stable. His changes have just been merged into the mainline kernel and will be included in 2.6.24. See the Sept. 15 Announcement at http://ecryptfs.sourceforge.net/ > > Thank you all, > > Charles -- David Kleikamp IBM Linux Technology Center ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Jfs-discussion mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jfs-discussion
