From nobody Sun Dec 24 11:50:07 2023 X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4SyfVB5TmQz54W8R for ; Sun, 24 Dec 2023 11:50:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from void@f-m.fm) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4SyfV96sv7z3VWW for ; Sun, 24 Dec 2023 11:50:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from void@f-m.fm) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=f-m.fm header.s=fm2 header.b=L5p2SzWr; dkim=pass header.d=messagingengine.com header.s=fm2 header.b=vsTolTrm; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of void@f-m.fm designates 66.111.4.25 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=void@f-m.fm; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=f-m.fm Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3C6A5C0101 for ; Sun, 24 Dec 2023 06:50:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 24 Dec 2023 06:50:09 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=f-m.fm; h=cc :content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1703418609; x=1703505009; bh=bQzFfhdAIi 5zqqif0tJGJWpFEd9zKW9YS0bAXseKdb0=; b=L5p2SzWrHaxy8T6lPw8xY7THcy oV0DJGw9l2XWPKgq7BF4raSRu3NF84Vo1kqJ3Wkb48g+/QN5ntIE8yBswTkqab8V soAI7NoIWL5EbBg4T4VapbaXVsU4I5hp7UVgICvtFlKj9WHjZBBjhqJjFmyV17si 1qKdW732XbXGFubWv7Nd2Z8e980OC4W1v9LmW26hrZBPXbI2qD5zfaUau6MSDNuU e2F5YTe/Tjt+oBeYo8vKA/cIJJ5i4MdIhmcFb/qWB+7a7X7dqU0tWlOnlRDvV9/Q h8/wY21NQ4g68UfiFXqu0b/q64hPeTKmQvM0YfLckWrGEfQlY5fck7u5z00w== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; t=1703418609; x=1703505009; bh=bQzFfhdAIi5zqqif0tJGJWpFEd9z KW9YS0bAXseKdb0=; b=vsTolTrmFALO+/Cx9HGOjgEGmUZabI5b0Jnv1hKo0wnO +55dN/zqApCFTQj4oZFuoYSPFWfSNUM0Ua1Pxy1J19b6uhgWf/RAuPZ2gQ7s1L5O mQWZfZR0VyRzFNwfTkXxFLt74aryh4qp/M+0aQ/8kQ19RnC6Cca3M2dRkz5Csnhv STnYU4HfIcszA8v6QmFaA3osV11DOqJQzkpnA7hxZxlS3omrcz+lHD6yKlxa1P9N dMN5uOTOG66biFGIvBthsustmJ1Km+2xUNBk1z7x/3tQc2gFCssIH/PdTAMtLdze s6RvjJimQu3Yg0a1ICTbXu6ekmncdxZ55HKz++v+tw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvkedrvddvuddgfeefucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujgesthdtre dttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvhhoihguuceovhhoihgusehfqdhmrdhfmheqnecuggftrfgr thhtvghrnhepkeeluddvlefhieelfefggffhffektdehleelgfdugfdvgeekjeejuddthe ehgfeunecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhep vhhoihgusehfqdhmrdhfmh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i2541463c:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA for ; Sun, 24 Dec 2023 06:50:09 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2023 11:50:07 +0000 From: void To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: measuring swap partition speed Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org References: List-Id: Filesystems List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-fs List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.68 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.98)[-0.978]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[f-m.fm,none]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[f-m.fm:s=fm2,messagingengine.com:s=fm2]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:66.111.4.25:c]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[66.111.4.25:from]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_GOOD(-0.10)[66.111.4.25:from]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-fs@freebsd.org]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:19151, ipnet:66.111.4.0/24, country:US]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-fs@freebsd.org]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_FROM(0.00)[f-m.fm]; DWL_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[messagingengine.com:dkim]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[f-m.fm:+,messagingengine.com:+]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[f-m.fm]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4SyfV96sv7z3VWW X-Spamd-Bar: --- On Sat, Dec 23, 2023 at 11:55:43AM -0800, Mark Millard wrote: >That last indicates another potentially significant difference >from my example benchmarks done for comparison to yours: > >GEOM_ELI: Device da0p3.eli created. >GEOM_ELI: Encryption: AES-XTS 256 >GEOM_ELI: Crypto: software > >That likely contributes to slowing down I/O for da0p3 and >possibly to leaving less time for I/O to other partitions >when da0p3 is in use. I think *some* slowdown is reasonable. What's happening here, though, amounts to blocking. 300-1000Kb/s against 16MB. zfs filesystem reads/writes are slower to an extent but it's not by a massive amount, like it is with swap, (and the swap is unencrypted) >If you had the resources to test avoiding the encrypted >partition for your type of media, that might prove >interesting. I think i did early on but I can do so again. I'll delete some swap partitions and format as ufs. >I've never had occasion to want to use any encrypted >partitions for my FreeBSD activity. A couple of reasons for this particular instance: 1. the hardware is portable and visible and would be easily stolen by someone of a mind to 2. the system performs authentication of which some parts are in clear txt >I'm unsure of the GEOM_ELI processing-time contributions >vs. "gstat -spod" reporting. yeah I've long wanted to measure the performance penalty for this, given that theres no aesni or equivalent capability available in the hardware. --