|
From: Dmitry Y. <fir...@ya...> - 2017-07-18 19:32:58
|
18.07.2017 21:55, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote: > > We have HASH function that returns a 64 bit integer. The algorithm is > bad and the result too small for a hash. Yes, and we have CORE-4436 with related complains. > I propose to extend the same function with a second parameter with the > algorithm name. Agreed. > When two parameters are passed, it will return a VARCHAR(64) CHARACTER > SET OCTETS. That's sufficient for a SHA-256, for example. Would it make sense to reserve more bytes, 256 or 1024 octets for example? Just to avoid extending the result every five years... > We implement (preferably getting code with compatible license or public > domain - like was done for SHA-1 used in authentication - instead of use > a bloated library) some algorithms (MD5, some useful SHA-*). No need for > "hash plugins" for now. Agreed. Dmitry |