[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 15:32:59 +0300
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: bt.c initial table size
Sayantan,
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 07:47:37AM +0530, Sayantan Datta wrote:
> How would you like to request the table size - the exact table size or a
> multiplier(as in table size = num_loaded_hashes * multiplier + prime) .
> Also, if you request a larger table size, you are not guaranteed that it
> will 'build the tables on first try', however, the probability of that
> happening is definitely higher.
I think request it via the multiplier, and it should be possible to
reuse a table size multiplier that a previous invocation of john tuned
itself to (in other words, those "trying next table size" lines should
include the multiplier value being tried next - and yes, they should
only use sizes that can later be requested explicitly).
Also, you already have some heuristics to determine initial
multiplier_ot and dupe_remove_ht_sz based on num_ld_hashes, but I got so
many "trying next table size" messages that I think those hardcoded
defaults need to be re-tuned.
Thanks,
Alexander
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
