2013-04-17 18:35:38 +00:00
|
|
|
What steps will reproduce the problem?
|
|
|
|
|
|
2013-04-18 16:34:07 +00:00
|
|
|
As described in
|
|
|
|
|
http://git-annex.branchable.com/backends/#comment-3c1cd45d2a015b4fc412dd813293ad7d
|
|
|
|
|
, sha512 is faster. On my 64-bit system, the speed difference is about
|
|
|
|
|
1.5times.
|
2013-04-17 18:35:38 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is the expected output? What do you see instead?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What version of git-annex are you using? On what operating system?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please provide any additional information below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2013-04-18 16:34:07 +00:00
|
|
|
> You are free to change the default in your own annexes. This is very easy
|
|
|
|
|
> to do: `echo '* annex.backend=SHA512E' > .gitattributes`
|
|
|
|
|
>
|
|
|
|
|
> I don't anticipate moving to SHA512, because
|
|
|
|
|
>
|
|
|
|
|
> 1. It makes `ls -l` really ugly. Each symlink takes like 4 lines
|
|
|
|
|
> on an 80 column terminal.
|
|
|
|
|
> 2. There are better hashes coming. Particularly SHA3. That should be
|
|
|
|
|
> faster and/or more secure. And without adding so much length to the
|
|
|
|
|
> hash.
|
|
|
|
|
>
|
|
|
|
|
> --[[Joey]]
|
2013-04-22 20:08:42 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[[done]]
|
