Searching in the web shows multiple cases with slow ecryptfs ,so it's not a
surprise .
Any reason to use ecryptfs instead of LUKS ?
Best Regards,
Strahil Nikolov
? ??????, 10 ????? 2021 ?., 03:51:08 ?. ???????+3, Fox <foxxz.net at
gmail.com> ??????:
I have a 12 node/brick gluster volume setup in disperse mode with a redundancy
of 4. On a 1gbps LAN I am getting expected performance of ~75MB/s write to it.
On a client with the glusterfs volume mounted I can setup an ecryptfs mount on
the gluster volume and have encrypted files and filenames on the gluster volume.
This works.
However, cpu usage of the gluster process skyrockets and write speeds drop to a
mere ~1.5MB/s on the ecryptfs mount.
I'm guessing ecryptfs is making a large volume of filesystem calls that is
taxing to glusterfs but less so on standard filesystems. I have enabled verbose
output on ecryptfs but that yielded no clues. And gluster logs don't show
anything unusual at first glance.
Any suggestions at where I might look for further information or for someone who
has solved this issue?
________
Community Meeting Calendar:
Schedule -
Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 14:30 IST / 09:00 UTC
Bridge: https://meet.google.com/cpu-eiue-hvk
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users at gluster.org
https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users