|
Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com |
Re: FUD about CGD and GBDE
From: Poul-Henning Kamp (phk
phk.freebsd.dk)
Date: Thu Mar 03 2005 - 06:18:45 CST
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
In message <20050303120421.GW86348cicely12.cicely.de>, Bernd Walter writes:
>No matter what disk you take - writes never have been atomic.
>The major difference I see is that you get a read error back in
>the disk failure case, while such a crypto failure produces more or
>less random data without any error.
>Mounting unclean filesystems rw for bg_fsck can be considered
>dangerous with such unexpected data corruption.
>And how would you know that a restore from backup is required for
>a damaged file?
100% true.
The trouble is that it would cost a lot in performance and a doubling
in metadata to protect yourself against this.
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phkFreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]