Re: Added hashes.

Joseph Ashwood <ashwood@msn.com> wrote:
> "Colin Percival" <cperciva@sfu.ca> wrote in message
> news:dnj8d5$np5$1@morgoth.sfu.ca...
>> Paul Rubin <http://phr.cx@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>> Ian Stirling <root@mauve.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>>> I'll disagree slightly with the 'half speed' comment - as in many cases
>>>> the limiting factor is disk speed, but of course it may be an issue.
>>>
>>> If you're talking about modern pc's and hashes like sha256, the cpu
>>> won't be able to keep up with the disk even for just one hash.
>>
>> On an AMD Athlon XP 2400+, I can sha256 a 1.1GB file in 16.3 seconds of
>> CPU time. It takes over twice that much disk time.
>
> That's only 69MB/sec (admirable though it is), a single Seagate Cheetah can
> handle up to 142MB/sec according to the spec sheet

But...
While it may be true that you can get 142MB out of a raw unfragmented
>180Mb contiguous file at the outside of the disk, with one the disk
otherwise idle, in real life performance will often be a lot lower than
this.
Received on Fri Dec 23 20:09:39 2005