On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 05:57:34PM +0200, Martin Uecker wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 11:28:20AM -0400, C. Scott Ananian wrote: > > > Yes, I guess this is the detail I was going to abandon. =) > > > > I viewed the fact that the top-level hash was dependent on the exact chunk > > makeup a 'misfeature', because it doesn't allow easy interoperability with > > existing non-chunked repos. > > I thought this as a misfeature too before I realized how > many advantages this has.
To make it more clear: Ofcourse it is a bug if the hash depends on unimportant implementation details. But a hash which is calculated recusively from subhashes is a lot more usefull than a hash which can only be calculated from the entire data at once. And if this hash can be recalculated cheaply from subhashes even if some data was inserted somewhere this is an even more usefull thing. Martin -- One night, when little Giana from Milano was fast asleep, she had a strange dream.
Description: Digital signature