Re: Cost of XLogInsert CRC calculations
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Cost of XLogInsert CRC calculations |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 23031.1110206390@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Cost of XLogInsert CRC calculations ("Mark Cave-Ayland" <m.cave-ayland@webbased.co.uk>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Cost of XLogInsert CRC calculations
Re: Cost of XLogInsert CRC calculations |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Mark Cave-Ayland" <m.cave-ayland@webbased.co.uk> writes: > Wow, a 64-bit CRC does seem excessive, especially when going back to Zmodem > days where a 50-100k file seemed to be easily protected by a 32-bit CRC. I'm > sure there are some error rates somewhere dependent upon the polynomial and > the types of error detected.... Try the following link towards the bottom: > http://www.ee.unb.ca/tervo/ee4253/crc.htm for some theory on detection rates > vs. CRC size. When the CRC size was decided, I recall someone arguing that it would really make a difference to have 1-in-2^64 chance of failure rather than 1-in-2^32. I was dubious about this at the time, but didn't have any evidence showing that we shouldn't go for 64. I suppose we ought to try the same example with a 32-bit CRC and see how much it helps. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: