添加链接
link管理
链接快照平台
  • 输入网页链接,自动生成快照
  • 标签化管理网页链接
Authentication Services
Command Line Specific Extensions
Compression and Archive Extensions
Cryptography Extensions
Database Extensions
Date and Time Related Extensions
File System Related Extensions
Human Language and Character Encoding Support
Image Processing and Generation
Mail Related Extensions
Mathematical Extensions
Non-Text MIME Output
Process Control Extensions
Other Basic Extensions
Other Services
Search Engine Extensions
Server Specific Extensions
Session Extensions
Text Processing
Variable and Type Related Extensions
Web Services
Windows Only Extensions
XML Manipulation
GUI Extensions
Keyboard Shortcuts
?
This help
Next menu item
Previous menu item
Previous man page
Next man page
Scroll to bottom
Scroll to top
Goto homepage
Goto search
(current page)
Focus search box
md5_file() calcule le MD5 du fichier filename en utilisant l'algorithme » RSA Data Security, Inc. MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm , puis retourne la valeur ainsi calculée. Le résultat est un nombre de 32 caractères hexadécimaux.
  • hash_file() - Génère une valeur de hachage en utilisant le contenu d'un fichier donné
  • hash_init() - Initialise un contexte de hachage incrémental
  • md5() - Calcule le md5 d'une chaîne
  • Chris
    14 years ago
    If you just need to find out if two files are identical, comparing file hashes can be inefficient, especially on large files. There's no reason to read two whole files and do all the math if the second byte of each file is different. If you don't need to store the hash value for later use, there may not be a need to calculate the hash value just to compare files. This can be much faster:

    <?php
    define
    ( 'READ_LEN' , 4096 );

    if(
    files_identical ( 'file1.txt' , 'file2.txt' ))
    echo
    'files identical' ;
    else
    echo
    'files not identical' ;

    // pass two file names
    // returns TRUE if files are the same, FALSE otherwise
    function files_identical ( $fn1 , $fn2 ) {
    if(
    filetype ( $fn1 ) !== filetype ( $fn2 ))
    return
    FALSE ;

    if(
    filesize ( $fn1 ) !== filesize ( $fn2 ))
    return
    FALSE ;

    if(!
    $fp1 = fopen ( $fn1 , 'rb' ))
    return
    FALSE ;

    if(!
    $fp2 = fopen ( $fn2 , 'rb' )) {
    fclose ( $fp1 );
    return
    FALSE ;
    }

    $same = TRUE ;
    while (!
    feof ( $fp1 ) and ! feof ( $fp2 ))
    if(
    fread ( $fp1 , READ_LEN ) !== fread ( $fp2 , READ_LEN )) {
    $same = FALSE ;
    break;
    }

    if(
    feof ( $fp1 ) !== feof ( $fp2 ))
    $same = FALSE ;

    fclose ( $fp1 );
    fclose ( $fp2 );

    return
    $same ;
    }
    ?>
    lukasamd at gmail dot com
    12 years ago
    It's faster to use md5sum than openssl md5:

    <?php
    $begin
    = microtime ( true );

    $file_path = '../backup_file1.tar.gz' ;
    $result = explode ( " " , exec ( "md5sum $file_path " ));
    echo
    "Hash = " . $result [ 0 ]. "<br />" ;

    # Here 7 other big files (20-300 MB)

    $end = microtime ( true ) - $begin ;
    echo
    "Time = $end " ;
    # Time = 4.4475841522217

    #Method with openssl
    # Time = 12.1463856900543
    ?>

    About 3x faster
    smartin
    16 years ago
    In response to using exec instead for performance (Nov 13 2007 post), It looks like the performance depends on the size of the file. See the results below using the same script from the original post. The first hash is with md5_file and the second is with openssl md5.

    With a 1MB file:
    Hash = df1555ec0c2d7fcad3a03770f9aa238a; time = 0.005006
    Hash = df1555ec0c2d7fcad3a03770f9aa238a; time = 0.01498

    With a 2MB file:

    Hash = 4387904830a4245a8ab767e5937d722c; time = 0.010393
    Hash = 4387904830a4245a8ab767e5937d722c; time = 0.016691

    With a 10MB file:

    Hash = b89f948e98f3a113dc13fdbd3bdb17ef; time = 0.241907
    Hash = b89f948e98f3a113dc13fdbd3bdb17ef; time = 0.037597

    Performance seems to change proportionally with the file size. Judging from the previous post's default file name (.mov) he/she was probably dealing with a large file. These are just quick tests and far from a perfect benchmark, but you might want to test your own files before assuming that the openssl solution is faster (ie, if working with small text files vs. movies, etc)