Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #5140
| From | Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer, comp.programming, comp.lang.java.databases |
| Subject | Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks |
| Date | 2011-06-08 23:02 +0100 |
| Organization | Stack Usenet News Service |
| Message-ID | <alpine.DEB.2.00.1106082242210.21659@urchin.earth.li> (permalink) |
| References | <iso8cm$a80$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
Cross-posted to 3 groups.
On Wed, 8 Jun 2011, Abu Yahya wrote: > A small application that I'm making requires me to store very long > strings (>1000 characters) in a database. So >1000, but by any chance <2000? <4000? > I will need to use these strings later to compare for equality to > incoming strings from another application. I will also want to add some > of the incoming strings to the storage, if they meet certain criteria. > > For my application, I get a feeling that storing these strings in my > table will be a waste of space, and will impact performance due to > retrieval and storage times, as well as comparison times. I assume by 'table' you mean an in-memory hashtable. I wouldn't be so quick to discount this - how many strings do you have? If you had 25 000 2000-character strings, that would be 100 MB; that's not an exorbitant amount. Access would be pretty quick. > I considered using an SHA-512 hash of these strings and storing them in > the database. However, while these will save on storage space, it will > take time to do the hashing before comparing an incoming string. So I'm > still wasting time. (Collisions due to hashing will not be a problem, > since an occasional false positive will not be fatal for my > application). If you're using a database, don't bother with a hash, just put the whole string in, index the column, and then do equality queries on it. A B-tree index will deal with this kind of query pretty efficiently. If you wanted to pursue in-memory approaches, i'd suggest constructing a trie of some sort. Tries are very fast at retrieval, don't need to access the whole key to identify a miss, and only need to access the whole key once to identify a hit - you always walk through the key from beginning to end (perhaps skipping some characters in some kinds of tree), stopping as soon as the key doesn't match, and only reaching the end if it does match. I haven't found a good overview of the current state of the art in tries, but look up Patricia tries, Judy tries, burst tries, fusion tries, and HAT tries. You could consider only storing a prefix of the strings - the first 100 characters, say - in the trie, to save memory, with the leaves having pointers to where the complete strings are stored on disk. tom -- The sun just came out, I can't believe it
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Storing large strings for future equality checks Abu Yahya <abu_yahya@invalid.com> - 2011-06-08 22:05 +0530
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks markspace <-@.> - 2011-06-08 09:49 -0700
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-06-08 17:28 +0000
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks Abu Yahya <abu_yahya@invalid.com> - 2011-06-08 23:45 +0530
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks Abu Yahya <abu_yahya@invalid.com> - 2011-06-08 23:45 +0530
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks David Kerber <dkerber@WarrenRogersAssociates.invalid> - 2011-06-08 12:58 -0400
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks Abu Yahya <abu_yahya@invalid.com> - 2011-06-08 23:49 +0530
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks Lothar Kimmeringer <news200709@kimmeringer.de> - 2011-06-08 20:31 +0200
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks Harry Tuttle <OTPXDAJCSJVU@spammotel.com> - 2011-06-09 10:50 +0200
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks bugbear <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> - 2011-06-09 11:44 +0100
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks Harry Tuttle <OTPXDAJCSJVU@spammotel.com> - 2011-06-10 10:15 +0200
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-08 11:07 -0700
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks Abu Yahya <abu_yahya@invalid.com> - 2011-06-08 23:58 +0530
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no> - 2011-06-09 12:38 +0200
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-09 17:32 -0400
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks bugbear <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> - 2011-06-10 10:51 +0100
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks Lothar Kimmeringer <news200709@kimmeringer.de> - 2011-06-08 20:28 +0200
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-06-08 22:02 +0000
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks rossum <rossum48@coldmail.com> - 2011-06-08 21:38 +0100
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-06-08 23:20 +0200
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-06-08 23:02 +0100
Re: Storing large strings for future equality checks Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-09 15:01 -0700
csiph-web