Why would bacula care about hardware LTO encryption?  It's transparent to
the software.

Patti Clark
Sr. Linux System Administrator



On 3/6/12 10:14 AM, "Jeremy Maes" <jma AT schaubroeck DOT be> wrote:

>Op 5/03/2012 22:37, Alan Brown schreef:
>> On 05/03/12 19:51, Alex Crow wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Alan,
>>>
>>> I am specifically addressing the encryption support within Bacula:
>>>
>>> http://www.bacula.org/en/dev-manual/main/main/Data_Encryption.html
>> Openssl compresses _if_ compiled with zlib (it usually is)
>>
>> It's not hard to test, write to a file instead of tape media and compare
>> size vs a tarball.
>>
>> If you are using a LTO device with built-in encryption then it's much
>> faster as there is a dedicated engine for the task (LTO encryption is
>> portable across drives as long as the key is retained)
>Except for the fact that bacula doesn't support hardware LTO encryption...
>> On that basis I'd only use bacula encryption for disk-based backups or
>> on tape devices without builtin encyption.
>Regards,
>Jeremy


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users