> While zfs on geli is less complex (in the sense that geli on zfs > involves two layers of filesystems), I'm concerned as to whether > encrypting the device will somehow affect zfs' ability to detect > silent corruption, self-heal, or in any other way adversely affect > zfs' functionality. In my mind, if I use geli on zfs, then I've > got zfs directly on a device and the zvol it's providing will be > transparently gaining the benefits of zfs' various features, providing > a "safety layer" against device failure and silent corruption that > I'm not sure if geli would detect.
These are very good questions - I ran ZFS on top of geli for a long time, and what I found was that when there were problems with the underlying discs, then geli would have problems and those would not be reported back to ZFS properly. I got lockups under those circumstances - when is witched to ZFS on top directly what I got were discs dropping out and ZFS properly continuing with the remaining drives. I never managed to characterise it well enougnh to file a PR I am afraid though - it only ever happened with failing hardware which made it hard to reproduce. -pete. _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
