On 20/10/2017 18:15, Michał Górny wrote: > W dniu pią, 20.10.2017 o godzinie 17∶42 +0200, użytkownik Paweł Hajdan, > Jr. napisał: >> Curious, do we have any measurements/estimates of the performance cost? > > With a single thread serial processing of all hashes, it's just sum of > times involved in every hash, i.e. Th = T1 + T2 + T3 + ... You'd have to > get some numbers to get something smarter out of it. > > If we assume we can do N threads, then cost of N algorithms is equal to > the slowest of them all. Which implies that having N algorithms is > fastest on systems capable of at least N threads. > > Taking a random comparison [1], it seems that SHA3/512 is 3-5 times > slower than SHA2/512. How large part of dependency calculation / other portage's operation is this though?
My point is, did profiling turn out hash computation as bottleneck, or is this more speculative? I'm still in favor of modernizing the hashes, just somewhat skeptical when performance is being mentioned. Paweł
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
