John Williams wrote: > On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Alex Elsayed <eternaleye@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Incidentally, you can be 'skeptical' all you like - per Austin's message >> upthread, he was testing the Crypto API. Thus, skeptical as you may be, >> hard evidence shows that SHA-1 was equal to or faster than CRC32, which >> is unequivocally simpler and faster than CityHash (though CityHash comes >> close). >> >> And the CPUs in question are *not* particularly rare - Intel since Sandy >> Bridge or so, the majority of SPARC systems, a goodly number of ARM >> systems via coprocessors... > > You can make convoluted, incorrect claims all you like, but the fact > is that SHA-1 is not as fast as Spooky2 or CityHash128 on x64 Intel > CPUs, and Murmur3 is faster on ARM systems. And it is not even close. > Your claims are absurd. And that _is_ the case; they are faster... *when both are software implementations* And I'm not sure what is "convoluted" or "incorrect" about saying "Look, empirical evidence!" -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
