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 decipher
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 i
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 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
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:
> https:
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
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?
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, 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
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. Th
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 m
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 exper
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 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 dire
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 wi
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 /dev/rw
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
18 matches
Mail list logo
