-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Bill Moran wrote:
> I expect that what happens is when a file with a duplicate filename is
> backed up for the first time, a checksum is generated to compare it to
> files of the same name already in the system. When incrementals are run,
> if the file is recently modified, the checksums are checked again.
>
> I think the first thing that would need to occur for Bacula to do this,
> is the use of something stronger than MD5. Perhaps SHA256.
Why would Bacula need to use SHA256? MD5 should be more than sufficient
to distinguish 2 different files that happen to have the same name and
filesize.
- From a checksum/hashing standpoint, Bacula should be ready to go. It's
the implementation of the duplicate detection and elimination algorythms
that requires careful planning and a lot of work to implement everywhere.
Greetings,
Michel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
iD8DBQFHAUyg2Vs+MkscAyURAqMzAJ9bfBSAfAEfEB41/YuzIUFoGvq8jwCfSdQN
GrYLqK5I4aC2t83S8IPnAx0=
=cqUN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
