Re: [fastCache] Answers...

Hi Just using a length check should be sufficient. crc32 and such is for lossy networks. Hard disk write failures are rare. Just writing a signature such as 'fast' at the end to ensure that no data truncation occured. Eg. [ file length] [ cache data ] [signature = 'fast_signature'] In my implementation of caching, i skipped the file length but if you are using NFS I guess it is safer. Regards, John "Pierre-Alain Joye" <paj@pearfr.org> wrote in message news:20020723113731.38ef83e1.paj@pearfr.org... > On 23 Jul 2002 11:21:16 +0200 > MARTY Fabien <fabien.marty@free.fr> wrote: > > > (Peter) > > > May I suggest a crc32() instead of md5()? It's between 3 and 10 times > > > faster, and there have been no duplicate values in a test to 1000000 items > > > (Source: Binarycloud-dev mailing list, originally from Smarty-dev). > > > > What about a choice between the two ? > > I m not sure about the ratio :), but that s sure crc32 is faster, and under certain conditions effectivly 10 times faster (dunno why :)). > > And, crc32 is naturally the function to check data integrity. > > +1 for crc :) > > pa