> On 18 May 2020, at 19:02, Jorrit Jongma <jorrit.jongma+rs...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think you're missing a point here. Two different checksum algorithms > are used in concert, the Adler-based one and the MD5 one. I > SSE-optimized the Adler-based one. The Adler-based hash is used to > _find_ blocks that might have shifted, while the MD5 hash is a strong > cryptographic hash used to _verify_ blocks and files. You wouldn't > want to replace the MD5 hash with the Adler-based hash, they are of a > different class. If you'd replace the MD5 hash with a different one, > you'd replace it with one of the SHA's or even xxHash.
Jorrit, I missed that point yes, sorry, thank you for clarifying again... We would then also need a SSE-version of the MD5 algorithm to have a full hardware / SSE support. But then, as you said before ; "single stream MD5 cannot be effectively optimized with SSE, at least I've not seen an SSE version faster than pure C". So, finally, https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13082 may not be achievable easily, at least it would not improve performance... Replacing MD5 with a different algorithm would impact both sender and receiver, but yes we may then use a faster (even perhaps hardware-backed) solution. Ben -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
