Full transparency on unwanted performance side effects of encrypted volumes

Questions about SNMP, Power, System, Logs, disk, & RAID.
cserl
Starting out
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:00 am

Re: Full transparency on unwanted performance side effects of encrypted volumes

Post by cserl » Thu May 09, 2019 12:43 am

Is there any transfer speed, security or other tradeoff with encrypted shares vs. volumes? I have 7 thin volumes.

P3R
Guru
Posts: 10720
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 1:39 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden (UTC+01:00)

Re: Full transparency on unwanted performance side effects of encrypted volumes

Post by P3R » Fri May 10, 2019 5:48 am

cserl wrote:
Thu May 09, 2019 12:43 am
Is there any transfer speed, security or other tradeoff with encrypted shares vs. volumes?
The limitations with shared folder encryption that I'm aware of are those that are documented:
  • The encryption key cannot include dollar signs ($) or equal signs (=).
  • Encrypted shared folders cannot be accessed via NFS.
  • Only x86 models support folder encryption.
  • You cannot change an encrypted folder’s volume or path.
  • The default shared folders cannot be encrypted.
Having multiple different encrypted shared folders would be a disadvantage for most other users as they usually have a single or at least very few encrypted volumes but isn't any different for you.
I have 7 thin volumes.
:-0

7 volumes in a 10 TB RAID group is an unusual configuration!
RAID have never ever been a replacement for backups. Without backups on a different system (preferably placed at another site), you will eventually lose data!

A non-RAID configuration (including RAID 0, which isn't really RAID) with a backup on a separate media protects your data far better than any RAID-volume without backup.

All data storage consists of both the primary storage and the backups. It's your money and your data, spend the storage budget wisely or pay with your data!

cserl
Starting out
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:00 am

Re: Full transparency on unwanted performance side effects of encrypted volumes

Post by cserl » Fri May 10, 2019 4:54 pm

Killer criterium: Encrypted shared folders cannot be accessed via NFS.

P3R
Guru
Posts: 10720
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 1:39 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden (UTC+01:00)

Re: Full transparency on unwanted performance side effects of encrypted volumes

Post by P3R » Sat May 11, 2019 3:47 am

For what application do you need NFS?
RAID have never ever been a replacement for backups. Without backups on a different system (preferably placed at another site), you will eventually lose data!

A non-RAID configuration (including RAID 0, which isn't really RAID) with a backup on a separate media protects your data far better than any RAID-volume without backup.

All data storage consists of both the primary storage and the backups. It's your money and your data, spend the storage budget wisely or pay with your data!

cserl
Starting out
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:00 am

Re: Full transparency on unwanted performance side effects of encrypted volumes

Post by cserl » Thu May 16, 2019 4:24 am

To make things worse: Virtualization is stopped during lock operation, too.
I will consider the downtime as Qnap memorial minutes.

Post Reply

Return to “System & Disk Volume Management”