On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 07:56:30PM +0100, Markus Krainz wrote: > > 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 I Have not tried encytion first, but I have several 3-way RAID1 with RAID first runnign without a problem for > 2 years now. (It is partition RAID1, only 3 disks involved.) I would imagine that encryption-first is a bit of a risk until the kernel barriers have been cleaned up. BTW, I see significantly better behavior with 2.6.36. Hope they manage to clean this mess up by 2.6.37. The kernel used to be tunable to not slow to a crawl when writing large amounts of data onto slow devices. One of the ugly secrets up to 2.6.35. Arno -- Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., CISSP -- Email: arno@xxxxxxxxxxx GnuPG: ID: 1E25338F FP: 0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F ---- Cuddly UI's are the manifestation of wishful thinking. -- Dylan Evans If it's in the news, don't worry about it. The very definition of "news" is "something that hardly ever happens." -- Bruce Schneier _______________________________________________ dm-crypt mailing list dm-crypt@xxxxxxxx http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt
