Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

AW: Uh, this is *not* a 64-bit CRC ...

From: Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>
To: "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "'pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: AW: Uh, this is *not* a 64-bit CRC ...
Date: 2001-03-01 08:06:46
Message-ID: 11C1E6749A55D411A9670001FA68796336821D@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> I just took a close look at the COMP_CRC64 macro in xlog.c.
> 
> This isn't a 64-bit CRC.  It's two independent 32-bit CRCs, one done
> on just the odd-numbered bytes and one on just the even-numbered bytes
> of the datastream.  That's hardly any stronger than a single 
> 32-bit CRC;
> it's certainly not what I thought we had agreed to implement.

Hmm, strange. I thought that we had agreed upon a 32 bit CRC
on the grounds, that it would be strong enough to guard a single
log record.

Andreas

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Dave PageDate: 2001-03-01 08:19:05
Subject: RE: Re: [HACKERS] Release in 2 weeks ...
Previous:From: Tatsuo IshiiDate: 2001-03-01 05:05:57
Subject: Re: SunOS4

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group