On Nov 18, 2007 2:34 AM, Ted Unangst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/17/07, Die Gestalt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to be explained why you have to do all these steps to encrypt
a partition. Isn't it possible to have some sort of filter driver that
simply ciphers and deciphers data as
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 14:34:22 -0800, Ted Unangst wrote:
On 11/16/07, Nick Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/16/07, Ted Unangst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
instead of pondering problems with using the whole disk, you could
just use svnd with a file.
Yeah but doesn't this hint at some
On Nov 17, 2007 4:24 AM, Jona Joachim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Who says the tool is used the wrong way?
You?
I think when OpenBSD developers go and write a howto about how to use a
tool in a certain way then you can be sure it's meant to be used this way.
Please refer to:
On Nov 17, 2007 6:48 PM, Chris Kuethe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 17, 2007 4:24 AM, Jona Joachim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Who says the tool is used the wrong way?
You?
I think when OpenBSD developers go and write a howto about how to use a
tool in a certain way then you can be sure
On 11/17/07, Jona Joachim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 14:34:22 -0800, Ted Unangst wrote:
it hints at using tools the wrong way leading to poor results.
Who says the tool is used the wrong way?
You?
me.
On 11/17/07, Die Gestalt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to be explained why you have to do all these steps to encrypt
a partition. Isn't it possible to have some sort of filter driver that
simply ciphers and deciphers data as it is received, a little bit like
a GEOM plugin?
anything is
instead of pondering problems with using the whole disk, you could
just use svnd with a file.
On Nov 16, 2007 12:36 AM, Clint Pachl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nonetheless, the bonnie++ results may provide some insight to the
problem for an experienced guru. What I found interesting is that the
CPU usage is really low for writes and rewrites when svnd is backed by
the whole disk. This is
On 11/16/07, Ted Unangst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
instead of pondering problems with using the whole disk, you could
just use svnd with a file.
Yeah but doesn't this hint at some horrible inefficiency in the stack somewhere?
-Nick
On Nov 16, 2007 1:32 PM, Ted Unangst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
instead of pondering problems with using the whole disk, you could
just use svnd with a file.
Well, I think he just found the itch. Now the question is whether
he'll scratch it, or will someone else find it interesting enough to
On 11/16/07, Nick Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/16/07, Ted Unangst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
instead of pondering problems with using the whole disk, you could
just use svnd with a file.
Yeah but doesn't this hint at some horrible inefficiency in the stack
somewhere?
it hints at
On 11/14/07, Clint Pachl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Reading through the archives I have found several people say that
encrypting via an svnd device isn't much slower than writing directly to
a raw unencrypted disk. While I found this to be true for svnd devices
backed by files, svnd devices
On Nov 15, 2007 3:22 PM, Nick Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is really really really weird. You'd think that files, having the
filesystem to go through before getting to the disk, would necessarily
be slower. There must be some kind of weirdness with the thing.
I concur.
My
I experimented with a few more things, but nothing helped. Someone said
run a bonnie++ benchmark to verify the performance. bonnie++ basically
told me what dd did, that svnd backed by a file is slow and svnd backed
by a disk or partition is floppy disk slow.
Nonetheless, the bonnie++ results
Instead of e.g. /dev/sd0a try /dev/rsd0a. I didn't try with svnd, but
when copying partitions with dd I use this.
--knitti
knitti wrote:
Instead of e.g. /dev/sd0a try /dev/rsd0a. I didn't try with svnd, but
when copying partitions with dd I use this.
I tried that, but like I said fdisk complained when the svnd device is
associated with the raw direct access disk device. For example
# vnconfig -k svnd0
knitti wrote:
On 11/14/07, Clint Pachl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
knitti wrote:
Instead of e.g. /dev/sd0a try /dev/rsd0a. I didn't try with svnd, but
when copying partitions with dd I use this.
I tried that, but like I said fdisk complained when the svnd device is
associated
On 11/14/07, Clint Pachl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
knitti wrote:
Instead of e.g. /dev/sd0a try /dev/rsd0a. I didn't try with svnd, but
when copying partitions with dd I use this.
I tried that, but like I said fdisk complained when the svnd device is
associated with the raw direct access
18 matches
Mail list logo
