On Tue, 2009-08-18 at 07:33 -0700, Jay Pipes wrote: > My plan was to rip the current implementation out, as it is specific > only to MyISAM, and replace with a storage-engine agnostic CHECKSUM > command, taking the form: > > CHECKSUM (ALL | TABLE table_identifier | TABLES table_list);
Hey there Jay, David and Arjen had some good points: On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 3:20 PM, David Axmark<[email protected]> wrote: > I am sure a 32 bit value here will look silly in 15 years. A 64/128 > bit will be as fast to compute. And if you have enough data one in 4 > billion may not sound as the best odds. On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 09:38 +1000, Arjen Lentz wrote: > if you do want to > build something, it'd have to be a pluggable, with pretty much per > table/db settings including fingerprint/calc algorithm, chunking > options, etc IMHO, the CHECKSUM command should take optional parameters indicating the hashing algorithm and length of hash with sane defaults. Cheers, C.J.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
