From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
After seeing the numbers of of openssl's sha256 vs intree, vs crc64 vs
none I decided to look at xxHash 16byte version which got stable in the
0.8 version (given I understood the signs right):
| Performance counter stats for './src/xz/.libs/xz -t xxh3.xz' (5
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
I created a test file via
dd if=/dev/zero bs=1024k count=1024 | xz -v -0 -Csha256
and compared the in-tree sha256 implementation on a Ryzen (CPU
acceleration available):
| Performance counter stats for 'xz --test sha256.xz' (5 runs):
|
|
On 2021-01-18 23:52:50 [+0200], Lasse Collin wrote:
> On 2021-01-10 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > I hope for sane defaults :)
>
> I hope so too. So far I have felt that the suggested solutions have
> significant flaws or downsides, and I'm not able to see what is a good
> enough
On 2021-01-13 Brett Okken wrote:
> Mark Adler has posted an optimized crc64 implementation on
> stackoverflow[1]. This can be reasonably easily ported to java (that
> post has a link to java impl on github[2] which warrants a little
> clean up, but gives a decent idea).
>
> I did a quick
