On 2010-11-11 19:26, Lasse Jensen wrote:
I havent tested my current setup this way, but my old
setup, RAID first, then encryption worked fine.
RAID first, den ecryption works for me, too.
But testing the ecrypting drives seperately, then RAID approach
failed.
What good is fast performance if the RAID 5 does not work? :D
dmcrypt/luks is used on
top of the raid. The performance of the i5 is not great,
despite hardware aes. Should not be this numbers a bit
higher than 158 MB/sec?
~/httptunnel-3.3/ hdparm -t --direct /dev/md1
/dev/md1:
Timing O_DIRECT disk reads: 936 MB in 3.00 seconds =
311.67 MB/sec
~/httptunnel-3.3/ hdparm -t --direct /dev/mapper/evol
/dev/mapper/evol:
Timing O_DIRECT disk reads: 476 MB in 3.01 seconds =
158.30 MB/sec
cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep -E (model name|aes)
model name : Intel(R) Core(TM) i5 CPU 660 @
3.33GHz
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic
sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr
sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx rdtscp lm constant_tsc
arch_perfmon pebs bts rep_good xtopology nonstop_tsc
aperfmperf pni pclmulqdq dtes64 monitor ds_cpl vmx smx est
tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr pdcm sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt aes lahf_lm
ida arat dts tpr_shadow vnmi flexpriority ept vpid
Well, it's still a lot better than my setup. Have you got any idea
how much power your system uses idle and under load?
I am afraid I cannot unplug the server right now and I do not have
an ampere meter lying around.
But I went for a 32nm dual-core-CPU, a small
motherboard with lots of sata plugs and an efficient power supply,
so I figured you can not get much
better power
consumption wise.
Forgot to mention, the above hdparam -t result is for cipher mode:
xts-plain64 and AES-256.
Regards,
Markus Krainz
|
_______________________________________________
dm-crypt mailing list
dm-crypt@xxxxxxxx
http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt
