Discussion:
ZFS and LUKS via zfs-fuse - recommended or not?
(too old to reply)
Valent Turkovic
2012-03-12 08:42:46 UTC
Permalink
Received: by 10.52.180.102 with SMTP id dn6mr1248984vdc.6.1331541767480;
Mon, 12 Mar 2012 01:42:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: zfs-fuse-/***@public.gmane.org
Received: by 10.52.116.239 with SMTP id jz15ls6503520vdb.2.gmail; Mon, 12 Mar
2012 01:42:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.52.24.244 with SMTP id x20mr1262307vdf.11.1331541766317; Mon,
12 Mar 2012 01:42:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by db5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com with HTTP; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 01:42:46
-0700 (PDT)
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/535.11 (KHTML,
like Gecko) Chrome/17.0.963.65 Safari/535.11,gzip(gfe)
X-Original-Sender: valent-ldiXTQUrc6oVAE43SjQgdNi2O/***@public.gmane.org
X-Original-Authentication-Results: ls.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain
of valent-ldiXTQUrc6oVAE43SjQgdNi2O/***@public.gmane.org designates internal as permitted sender)
smtp.mail=valent-ldiXTQUrc6oVAE43SjQgdNi2O/***@public.gmane.org; dkim=pass header.i=@otvorenamreza.org
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list zfs-fuse-/***@public.gmane.org; contact zfs-fuse+owners-/***@public.gmane.org
List-ID: <zfs-fuse.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 61494660866
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/zfs-fuse/post?hl=en_US>, <mailto:zfs-fuse-/***@public.gmane.org>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:zfs-fuse+help-/***@public.gmane.org>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/zfs-fuse?hl=en_US>
Sender: zfs-fuse-/***@public.gmane.org
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/zfs-fuse/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:zfs-fuse+subscribe-/***@public.gmane.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/zfs-fuse/subscribe?hl=en_US>,
<mailto:googlegroups-manage+61494660866+unsubscribe-/***@public.gmane.org>
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkK+H83TlV7sbLs8Lw2WoKgx/yu1VsUOC4aLiwrD0wnTUVodrD8nMS+IUEfAbpmoSY4xIbr
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.fuse.zfs/7308>

I have Fedora 16 system with latest zfs-fuse 0.7, should I avoid using
LUKS or is it safe to combine it with zfs-fuse ?

If it is not safe what is recommended for encrypting zfs-fuse volumes?

How relevant are these older posts:
http://groups.google.com/group/zfs-fuse/browse_thread/thread/263ad867ff6a1cdc

Thanks!
--
To post to this group, send email to zfs-fuse-/***@public.gmane.org
To visit our Web site, click on http://zfs-fuse.net/
Andras Korn
2012-03-12 08:56:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Valent Turkovic
I have Fedora 16 system with latest zfs-fuse 0.7, should I avoid using
LUKS or is it safe to combine it with zfs-fuse ?
If it is not safe what is recommended for encrypting zfs-fuse volumes?
It shouldn't be "unsafe" in the sense that it increases the chance of data
corruption, but as it introduces additional complexity, it may certainly
increase the frequency of crashes.

I had four systems with LUKS and zfs-fuse: three lightly loaded ones and a
heavily loaded one. The ones with light load worked pretty well (zfs-fuse
would crash about once every month); on the heavily loaded system, zfs-fuse
crashed frequently (sometimes even before it was able to mount all
datasets).
Post by Valent Turkovic
http://groups.google.com/group/zfs-fuse/browse_thread/thread/263ad867ff6a1cdc
My setup was different than the one described here. I had a Linux mdraid
device spanning multiple disks; LUKS on top of that; LVM on top of LUKS; and
I used an LVM LV as a vdev for zfs.
--
Andras Korn <korn at elan.rulez.org>
Discoveries are made by not following instructions.
--
To post to this group, send email to zfs-fuse-/***@public.gmane.org
To visit our Web site, click on http://zfs-fuse.net/
Manuel Amador
2012-03-12 09:50:03 UTC
Permalink
It appears to be safe but BE WARE of initramfs reassignment of device file
names in /dev. I thought I had lost ALL -- turns out the stupid zpool.cache
pointed to the wrong dm device.

I fixed this by simply not including zpool.cache during the initramfs build.
Post by Valent Turkovic
I have Fedora 16 system with latest zfs-fuse 0.7, should I avoid using
LUKS or is it safe to combine it with zfs-fuse ?
If it is not safe what is recommended for encrypting zfs-fuse volumes?
http://groups.google.com/group/zfs-fuse/browse_thread/thread/263ad867ff6a1cd
c
Thanks!
--
Manuel Amador (Rudd-O)
http://rudd-o.com/
--
To post to this group, send email to zfs-fuse-/***@public.gmane.org
To visit our Web site, click on http://zfs-fuse.net/
Loading...