Tom Lane wrote:
> "Mark Cave-Ayland" <m.cave-ayland@webbased.co.uk> writes:
> > I was just researching some articles on compression (zlib) and I saw mention
> > of the Adler-32 algorithm which is supposed to be slightly less accurate
> > than an equivalent CRC calculation but significantly faster to compute. I
> > haven't located a good paper comparing the error rates of the two different
> > checksums,
>
> ... probably because there isn't one. With all due respect to the Zip
> guys, I doubt anyone has done anywhere near the analysis on Adler-32
> that has been done on CRCs. I'd much prefer to stick with true CRC
> and drop it to 32 bits than go with a less-tested algorithm. Throwing
> more bits at the problem doesn't necessarily create a safer checksum.
Agreed. 64-bit was overkill when we added it, and it is now shown to be
a performance problem.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073