| From: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> |
|---|---|
| To: | Horst Herb <hherb(at)malleenet(dot)net(dot)au> |
| Cc: | "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: CRC was: Re: beta testing version |
| Date: | 2000-12-07 10:17:23 |
| Message-ID: | 3A2F63B3.75A46541@tm.ee |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Horst Herb wrote:
>
> > This may be implemented very fast (if someone points me where
> > I can find CRC func). And I could implement "physical log"
> > till next monday.
>
> I have been experimenting with CRCs for the past 6 month in our database for
> internal logging purposes. Downloaded a lot of hash libraries, tried
> different algorithms, and implemented a few myself. Which algorithm do you
> want? Have a look at the openssl libraries (www.openssl.org) for a start -if
> you don't find what you want let me know.
>
> As the logging might include large data blocks, especially now that we can
> TOAST our data, I would strongly suggest to use strong hashes like RIPEMD or
> MD5 instead of CRC-32 and the like. Sure, it takes more time tocalculate and
> more place on the hard disk, but then: a database without data integrity
> (and means of _proofing_ integrity) is pretty worthless.
The choice of hash algoritm could be made a compile-time switch quite
easyly I guess.
---------
Hannu
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Meskes | 2000-12-07 13:05:54 | ECPG todo |
| Previous Message | pejac | 2000-12-07 10:06:16 | BUG WITH CREATE FUNCTION....... |