> On 18/07/2017 16:32, Dmitry Yemanov wrote: > > > > > >> When two parameters are passed, it will return a VARCHAR(64) > >> CHARACTER SET OCTETS. That's sufficient for a SHA-256, for example. > > > > Would it make sense to reserve more bytes, 256 or 1024 octets for > > example? Just to avoid extending the result every five years... > > Ok for me, I believe 256 would be good then, as very large column is difficult > to read in ISQL.
If we are going to support common HASH functions then we need to support all currently/commonly available. In which case a length of at least 512 bits/128 bytes (for SHA-512 and SHA3-512) is required -- difficulty reading is the last thing that should be of concern. Sean ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
