+1 on both from me. I don't see good reason not to do so. Jeremy Zawodny wrote: > On 11/6/08, Mats Kindahl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Good point. We currently have the checksum after all chunks for a >>> packet are sent, and this may be any number of rows in a result set, >>> depending on how the server chunks this up. It may make sense to >>> insert a checksum after each chunk, rather than a single computed >>> from all chunks in a packet. Right now the maximum chunk size is 64k >>> (2 byte length), so you won't need to waste reading more than that >>> before you realize a chunk is bad. >> >> I second checksumming each chunk. > > > Ditto. > > Please make it default. Most people will just use the default, and then when >> things go foul, they will start cursing the creators (of the software). If >> there >> are some people who are concerned about performance on this level, they can >> easily turn it off (hopefully well aware of all the consequences). > > > Absolutely. > > Jeremy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
