Hi Frank,
> On Jul 14, 2016, at 12:23 AM, Frank Siebenlist
> wrote:
>
> Python's native hashing module (hashlib), shows similar results:
> - about the same time when passed the 8MB blob in one go
> (probably expected as both use openssl)
> - substantial overhead when looping over small chunks (
> The perf by chunk is a consequence of how SHA256 works.
I politely disagree...
Having chunks smaller or larger than SHA256's 64 byte block size
doesn't seem to affect the timing results in any noticeable way.
If you do not fill-up SHA256's block-size buffer with update(), it
simply returns, an
> On Jul 14, 2016, at 1:23 AM, Frank Siebenlist
> wrote:
>
> Guess hashlib used some better optimization on the C-calls (?).
>
> This is my last update on this observation.
> Conclusion is "so be it", and using bigger chunks for hashing gives
> (much) better performance.
I believe this is go
