On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 09:17:19PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 04:53:09PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > I just took a close look at the COMP_CRC64 macro in xlog.c.
> > >
> > > This isn't a 64-bit CRC. It's two independent 32-bit CRCs, one done
> > > on just the odd-numbered bytes and one on just the even-numbered bytes
> > > of the datastream. That's hardly any stronger than a single 32-bit CRC;
> > > it's certainly not what I thought we had agreed to implement.
> > >
> > > We can't change this algorithm without forcing an initdb, which would be
> > > a rather unpleasant thing to do at this late stage of the release cycle.
> > > But I'm not happy with it. Comments?
> >
> > This might be a good time to update:
> >
> > The CRC-64 code used in the SWISS-PROT genetic database is (now) at:
> >
> > ftp://ftp.ebi.ac.uk/pub/software/swissprot/Swissknife/old/SPcrc.tar.gz
> >
> > From the README:
> >
> > The code in this package has been derived from the BTLib package
> > obtained from Christian Iseli <chris@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch>.
> > From his mail:
> >
> > The reference is: W. H. Press, S. A. Teukolsky, W. T. Vetterling, and
> > B. P. Flannery, "Numerical recipes in C", 2nd ed., Cambridge University
> > Press. Pages 896ff.
> >
> > The generator polynomial is x64 + x4 + x3 + x1 + 1.
> >
> > I would suggest that if you don't change the algorithm, at least change
> > the name in the sources. Were you to #ifdef in a real crc-64, and make
> > a compile-time option to select the old one, you could allow users who
> > wish to avoid the initdb a way to continue with the existing pair of
> > CRC-32s.
>
> Added to TODO:
>
> * Correct CRC WAL code to be normal CRC32 algorithm
Um, how about
* Correct CRC WAL code to be a real CRC64 algorithm
instead?
Nathan Myers
ncm@zembu.com