Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B8F02E005A
	for <pgsql-bugs-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 20 Feb 2008 07:21:12 -0400 (AST)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 15864-09 for <pgsql-bugs-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 20 Feb 2008 07:21:09 -0400 (AST)
Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.175])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCAFE2E0059
	for <pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org>; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 07:21:08 -0400 (AST)
Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id j3so702022ugf.49
	for <pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org>; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 03:21:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.67.22.14 with SMTP id z14mr1015678ugi.24.1203506466604;
	Wed, 20 Feb 2008 03:21:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from patxifijo.ofi.peoplecall.com ( [62.22.27.134])
	by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z40sm2971191ugc.82.2008.02.20.03.21.05
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
	Wed, 20 Feb 2008 03:21:05 -0800 (PST)
From: Francisco Olarte Sanz <folarte@peoplecall.com>
Organization: peoplecall.com
To: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #3965: UNIQUE constraint fails on long column values
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 12:21:03 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7
References: <200802181130.m1IBUNdu060026@wwwmaster.postgresql.org>
	<47BBEADA.4090308@enterprisedb.com>
	<877ih0x9kk.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
In-Reply-To: <877ih0x9kk.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200802201221.03738.folarte@peoplecall.com>
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200802/180
X-Sequence-Number: 19747

On Wednesday 20 February 2008, Gregory Stark wrote:

> Unless you need cryptographic security I would not suggest using MD5. MD5
> is intentionally designed to take a substantial amount of CPU resources to
> calculate.

I thought it was the exact opposite, quoting from RFC1321:

The MD5 algorithm is designed to be quite fast on 32-bit machines. In
   addition, the MD5 algorithm does not require any large substitution
   tables; the algorithm can be coded quite compactly.

F.O.S.