Re: linux loopback devices

[Casey Boone <caseyboone@gmail.com>]

the different using the loopback with encryption and without is 2MB/s,
while the difference between using the loopback and not using it is
30MB/s.  i even rechecked myself because i just knew i had something
set up wrong.

even taking into consideration that using the loopback would mean an
extra in and out, this all occurs in ram and i just cannot imagine
that the ram access is that slow.

after showing the performance differences the customer decided to
leave it unencrypted (not sure why he wanted it encrypted anyway, the
way he wanted it would have meant that the key was stored on the
system...)

it still puzzles me, so i will probably look into it more later, might
post to the lkml and ask, didnt see anyone else with the same problem
(but it might have been lost to me as there are quite a few emails
containing "loopback")

Casey


On Tue,  8 Feb 2005 19:27:49 -0600 (CST),
mike808@users.sourceforge.net <mike808@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> Casey Boone wrote ..
> > customer wants his data encrypted, but the performance of the loopback
> > is utterly horrible
> 
> Remember that the system is processing the data twice in the loopback.
> Once in, once out.
> 
> Also, are you sure it's not the encryption that is slowing you down?
> Encryption isn't exactly a cheap computation either.
> 
> mike/
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo@silug.org with
> "unsubscribe silug-discuss" in the body.
>

-
To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo@silug.org with
"unsubscribe silug-discuss" in the body.