Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > On Tue, 26 Aug 2008, Darren J Moffat wrote: >> >> zfs set checksum=sha256 > > Expect performance to really suck after setting this.
Do you have evidence of that ? What kind of workload and how did you test it ? I've recently been benchmarking using filebench filemicro and filemacro workloads for ZFS Crypto and as part of setting my base line I compared the default checksum (flecher2) with sha256 and I didn't see a big enough difference to classify it as "sucks". Here is my evidence for the filebench filemacro workload: http://cr.opensolaris.org/~darrenm/zfs-checksum-compare.html This was done on a X4500 running the zfs-crypto development binaries. In the interest of "full disclosure" I have changed the sha256.c in the ZFS source to use the default kernel one via the crypto framework rather than a private copy. I wouldn't expect that to have too big an impact (I will be verifying it I just didn't have the data to hand quickly). -- Darren J Moffat _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
