-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
"And now for something completely different." This is not a Red Hat-specific issue, but there are some db-savvy people in the peanut gallery. I'm hoping that someone with an appreciation of database performance issues can tell me what kind of a hit I'd be likely to suffer if I choose to store, index, and search SSH public host keys (1024 bit) rather than their fingerprints (128 bits) in a table. I'm currently working with MySQL, but would be interested in how this might pan out in Postgres as well. I don't have experience benchmarking this sort of thing. The issue for me is whether it's worth the overhead to convert the key to a fingerprint before searching, or if I'm better off skipping that step and just indexing the key itself. - -d - -- David Talkington PGP key: http://www.prairienet.org/~dtalk/0xCA4C11AD.pgp - -- http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/pale_blue_dot.html -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 6.5.8 Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.75-6 iQA/AwUBPFb17r9BpdPKTBGtEQLSvACgv+f4SVyN3ZBaHoxk0GKPNxe8pyIAoO6k xfwzmRyKrObHyTqlT+76x7ry =kr70 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Redhat-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
