CRC was: Re: beta testing version - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Horst Herb
Subject CRC was: Re: beta testing version
Date
Msg-id 00e701c06021$04f92d00$fcee2bcb@midgard
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: beta testing version  ("Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM>)
Responses Re: CRC was: Re: beta testing version
List pgsql-hackers
> 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.

Horst



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tatsuo Ishii
Date:
Subject: Re: A mb problem in PostgreSQL
Next
From: "xuyifeng"
Date:
Subject: pre-beta is slow