Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 06:28:17 -0700 From: Fred Wang <waffle.contest@...il.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Judy array On Sep 14, 2015, at 8:40 PM, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote: > The addition of source() method for raw-md5 helps a lot. Without it, > and without the copy-on-write avoidance in cracker.c, I couldn't run > 8 processes on this machine without it getting into swap. Perhaps we > should add source() to more formats. So, given the existing implementation does not lend it self well to large-scale (read: large unsolved lists) processing, and the current leaning away from tightly-coupled multiprocessing, is my approach something the John developers are interested in? I can certainly pull bits of my code into John, integrate it, and give you something to try. I continue to suggest, however, that moving to a threaded mode, rather than fork, would be a far better performance overall.
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.