Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > gnu.bash.bug > #16184
| From | Koichi Murase <myoga.murase@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | gnu.bash.bug |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] Implement rehashing for associative arrays (Re: speeding up hash_search?) |
| Date | 2020-04-20 18:48 +0900 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.774.1587376155.3066.bug-bash@gnu.org> (permalink) |
| References | <CALv3B7aiTbhpyUL17Eg5prH39EgMP8uSDdD554OdND3LFETAQg@mail.gmail.com> <CAFLRLk8ydO6ev8wRcJ35kzzN3Yt2_9sjsc6L+C0CC6dCxud_NA@mail.gmail.com> <CALv3B7bzh3degKPCe5c_avUc90L+bE8jqKKcaVo13zwqEyB5-A@mail.gmail.com> <CAFLRLk-XAU3rrRHy1wWdY7Py-gkLaU-UfiPc47MOEA8eutYx1A@mail.gmail.com> |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw
2020-04-20 10:00 George Jones <fooologist@gmail.com>: > Thank you. Patch applied and (performance) tested with come tests > I was working on > https://github.com/eludom/snippits/tree/master/bash/tests > .... bottom line: Thank you for the measurements. Also, I am sorry that I disturbed your plan for contributing to Bash. I actually initially doubted that the insertion with the current implementation is O(N), so I created the test first and then found that it is an easy fix rather than reimplementing it by B-tree or other data structures. I couldn't stop my interest in how much it is improved by the easy fix. Nevertheless, I have not tuned the parameters of rehashing. Actually it is a tradeoff between the memory consumption and the computational time, so it is a matter of preference to some extent. I attach an updated patch which exposes some parameters. If you have an interest, you can play by changing the value of the parameters `HASH_REHASH_MULTIPLIER' and `HASH_MAX_LOADFACTOR' defined in `hashlib.h'. -- Koichi
Back to gnu.bash.bug | Previous | Next | Find similar
Re: [PATCH] Implement rehashing for associative arrays (Re: speeding up hash_search?) Koichi Murase <myoga.murase@gmail.com> - 2020-04-20 18:48 +0900
csiph-web