how badly does encrypting the root file system crush my performance?

[Andrew Farris]

Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Feb 2008, Alan wrote:
> 
>>> On 2/25/08, Alan <alan at clueserver.org> wrote:
>>>>  >   the context here might make this question inappropriate, but i
>>>>  > installed f9 alpha inside virtualbox in two different ways, with only
>>>>  > one difference -- whether the all-encompassing root file system was
>>>>  > encrypted or not.
>>>>  >
>>>>  >   within virtualbox, the encrypted VM is *waaaaay* slower than the
>>>>  > unencrypted one.  should i expect the same performance difference
>>>> with
>>>>  > regular hard disk installs?  just curious.  i expected a difference
>>>>  > but this is *hugely* noticeable and almost unusable.
>>>>
>>>> That sounds like an artifact of virtualbox.  I am using full disk
>>>>  encryption on F9 alpha and I am seeing little, if any, slowdown.  Maybe
>>>>  64-bit helps.
>>> Same here, on i686.
>> As a side note, I have run VMWare with and without the hardware
>> virtualization.  It DOES make a difference.  I do not know if
>> VirtualBox uses the hardware virtualization.  If it does not, it
>> should.
> 
> that may be, but the difference here has nothing to do with whether
> the H/W virtualization is being used or not, it's whether encryption
> is being used or not.  in both cases, the status of the H/W
> virtualization is going to be the same.

True, but the 'cost' or performance impact of the encryption will be much higher 
without the hardware virtualization, essentially making it a bigger problem if 
it already is impacting performance.

-- 
Andrew Farris <lordmorgul at gmail.com> www.lordmorgul.net
  gpg 0xC99B1DF3 fingerprint CDEC 6FAD BA27 40DF 707E A2E0 F0F6 E622 C99B 1DF3
No one now has, and no one will ever again get, the big picture. - Daniel Geer
----                                                                       ----