> Therefore, I propose defining new data types like "CRC32", "CRC64", > "RIPEMD", whatever (rather than pluggable arbitrary CRCs). I suspect that you are really looking at the problem from the wrong end. CRC checking should not need to be done by the database user, with a fancy type. The postgres server itself should guarantee data integrity - you shouldn't have to worry about it in userland. This is, in fact, what the recent discussion on this list has been proposing... Chris
- RE: CRC was: Re: [HACKERS] beta testing version Mikheev, Vadim
- Re: CRC was: Re: [HACKERS] beta testing versi... Tom Lane
- Re: CRC was: Re: [HACKERS] beta testing v... Nathan Myers
- Re: CRC was: Re: [HACKERS] beta testi... Tom Lane
- Re: CRC was: Re: [HACKERS] beta t... Nathan Myers
- [HACKERS] RFC: CRC datatype Horst Herb
- Re: [HACKERS] RFC: CRC datatype Christopher Kings-Lynne
- Re: [HACKERS] RFC: CRC datat... Horst Herb
- Re: [HACKERS] RFC: CRC d... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] RFC: C... Horst Herb
- Re: [HACKERS] RFC: C... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] RFC: CRC d... Nathan Myers
- Re: [HACKERS] RFC: C... Horst Herb
- Re: CRC was: Re: [HACKERS] beta testi... Bruce Guenter
- Re: CRC was: Re: [HACKERS] beta t... Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: CRC was: Re: [HACKERS] b... Bruce Guenter
- Re: CRC was: Re: [HACKERS] beta t... Tom Lane