On Dienstag, 1. Januar 2008 Paul J Stevens wrote: > Consider that 9 out of 10 times when you retrieve chunks based on > their hash value, they will indeed be the same chunk. But in each of > those cases we *must* do a memcmp to make bloody sure they really are > the same. I don't see any way around that.
Ah, I just read this after sending my last mail. Of course, a memcmp should be done on any already existing hash, ehrm, the attachment that caused it. That way, message insertion could get a bit harder in terms of cpu/memory/network pressure. mfg zmi -- // Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc ----- http://it-management.at // Tel: 0676/846 914 666 .network.your.ideas. // PGP Key: "curl -s http://zmi.at/zmi.asc | gpg --import" // Fingerprint: EA39 8918 EDFF 0A68 ACFB 11B7 BA2D 060F 1C6F E6B0 // Keyserver: www.keyserver.net Key-ID: 1C6FE6B0
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ DBmail mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.fastxs.nl/mailman/listinfo/dbmail
