From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.saout.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.saout.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4y-Au9tx31kt for ; Sat, 29 Oct 2011 20:00:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from echo517.server4you.de (echo517.server4you.de [85.25.138.180]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.saout.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Sat, 29 Oct 2011 20:00:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from dslb-084-057-166-150.pools.arcor-ip.net ([84.57.166.150] helo=[192.168.98.22]) by echo517.server4you.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1RKDCa-00062N-GN for dm-crypt@saout.de; Sat, 29 Oct 2011 20:00:17 +0200 Message-ID: <4EAC3F2F.8020001@morlix.de> Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2011 20:00:15 +0200 From: morlix MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4EA98296.40601@morlix.de> <4EA9A453.8040103@philippwendler.de> In-Reply-To: <4EA9A453.8040103@philippwendler.de> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigE09BD2E6766B48FCFDFA64AF" Subject: Re: [dm-crypt] Strange performance problems List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: dm-crypt@saout.de This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigE09BD2E6766B48FCFDFA64AF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, ok i will give it a try. I already tested some other ciphers and i can definitely say, that the cipher doesn=B4t change this strange behavior. Kind regards, morlix Am 27.10.2011 20:34, schrieb Philipp Wendler: > Hi, >=20 > Am 27.10.2011 18:11, schrieb morlix: >=20 >> Which brings ~5MB/s write performance on the encrypted raid 5. >> >> What i find strange is the huge avgqu-sz. >> >> >> I have no clue what the reason for this poor write performance could b= e. >> >> Thanks for every hint to resolve this issue. >=20 > I have the same problem[1][2]. > One other person with the same problem contacted me after this. > Apparently for him a smaller chunk size of the raid 5 (64k instead of > 512k) solved the problem, but I have not been able to test this yet. I > would be very interested to know whether this helps for you. >=20 > Greetings, Philipp >=20 > [1] http://www.saout.de/pipermail/dm-crypt/2011-July/001773.html > [2] http://superuser.com/q/305716/84630 > _______________________________________________ > dm-crypt mailing list > dm-crypt@saout.de > http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt --------------enigE09BD2E6766B48FCFDFA64AF Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk6sPy8ACgkQVvh+B8/faomd9ACeNkccKuDSidyA3BGJkNSJ880h caYAniY/ldWy1ZhuS7X38hX2alxdRavg =r8HT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigE09BD2E6766B48FCFDFA64AF--