Re: [PATCH 5/6] Allow to use crc32 as a lighter checksum on index

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Feb 6, 2012, at 8:04 PM, Dave Zarzycki <zarzycki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Feb 6, 2012, at 7:17 PM, Shawn Pearce <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> I haven't really put a lot of thought into this. But I suspect CRC-32
>> is sufficient on the index file, until it gets so big that the
>> probability of a bit flip going undetected is too high due to the size
>> of the file, but then we are into the "huge" index size range that has
>> you trying to swap out SHA-1 for CRC-32 because SHA-1 is too slow. Uhm
>> no.
> 
> CRCs are designed to be implemented in hardware and provide basic single-bit error checking for networking packets of disk blocks. With a good polynomial, they're reasonably effective at detecting a single-bit error within 8 or 16 kilobytes:
> 
>    http://www.ece.cmu.edu/~koopman/networks/dsn02/dsn02_koopman.pdf

s/packets of disk blocks/packets or disk blocks/g
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]