You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Right now Rucio only supports adler32 and md5 checksums via two specific columns for these checksums. This creates problems if a community has different checksums (e.g. CMS historically used crc checksums) and wants to store them. On the dev meeting on 2019-03-28 it was discussed to extend Rucio with a generic checksum column of string type. Multiple checksums can be added (comma-separated) to this column, always specifying the checksum type. E.g. md5:1234,adler32:5678,crc:123
We would have to specify a strategy in migrating to this new checksum column.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Not really. We do provide already adler32 and md5 columns in the database. #3538 is just about an issue that at some parts of the code adler32 is falsly required.
Motivation
Right now Rucio only supports adler32 and md5 checksums via two specific columns for these checksums. This creates problems if a community has different checksums (e.g. CMS historically used crc checksums) and wants to store them. On the dev meeting on 2019-03-28 it was discussed to extend Rucio with a generic checksum column of string type. Multiple checksums can be added (comma-separated) to this column, always specifying the checksum type. E.g.
md5:1234,adler32:5678,crc:123
We would have to specify a strategy in migrating to this new checksum column.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: