RE: Re: CRC

From: "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM>
To: "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: RE: Re: CRC
Date: 2000-12-11 18:09:01
Message-ID: 8F4C99C66D04D4118F580090272A7A234D31F0@sectorbase1.sectorbase.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> One thing we should look at before going with a 64-bit method is the
> extra storage space for the larger checksum. We can clearly afford
> an extra 32 bits for a checksum on an 8K disk page, but if Vadim is
> envisioning checksumming each individual XLOG record then the extra
> space is more annoying.

We need in checksum for each record. But there is no problem with
64bit CRC: log record header is 8byte aligned, so CRC addition
will add 8bytes to header anyway. Is there any CRC64 code?

Vadim

Responses

  • Re: Re: CRC at 2000-12-11 20:42:31 from Bruce Guenter

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ned Lilly 2000-12-11 18:17:51 Great Bridge PostgreSQL products and services
Previous Message Adriaan Joubert 2000-12-11 18:01:31 Re: RFC C++ Interface